re: This is getting out of hand

quote:

---

They're not. And a lot of times, they're ignorant. It's why they're on the jury in the first place.

---

And it works both ways. 2 quick stories, one on either side so I'm not accused of being one sided.

1. Police chase a robbery suspect from the scene to the guys house. He pulls into the driveway and runs into his house. Jury acquitted him because the cops never testified that they felt the hood of his car to feel if it was hot to verify it was his car, despite the fact that they had not lost visual of him. Ignorace.

2. Man charged with robbery. Shaky circumstantial evidence. Basically, man in video was black. Defendant was black. Man even produced evidence in the form of receipts showing he was out of town at the time. Jury convicted because they didn't like the dress suit the defendant's female attorney was wearing. Truth. Conviction later set aside however. But still shows the ignorance that can, at times, sit on juries.