Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 8th Jun 2008 15:53 UTC, submitted by sonic2000gr
Thread beginning with comment 317796
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: This should shut a few people up
by Anonymous Penguin on Mon 9th Jun 2008 05:17
in reply to "RE[4]: This should shut a few people up"
RE[6]: This should shut a few people up
by dlundh on Mon 9th Jun 2008 07:57
in reply to "RE[5]: This should shut a few people up"
Oh, come one. There was more than enough circumstantial evidence (and no credible explanation from Reiser) to convict him. You only have to prove something beyond a _reasonable_ doubt - something that was very efficiently made, not least by Reisers self-incriminatory rambling on the witness stand.




Member since:
2005-06-29
No, a jury must must judge according to the evidence at hand..
Common belief is different and has no bearing on the legal outcome of the case. You believe what you want, others will believe what they want.
Those that believed he was guilty, were correct.