SURPRISE HEARING Friday 18th August

Agreed, Hopeful One. Hopefully the outcome won't be as disappointing this time...
 
cnn is showing a group of people standing outside waiting. No audio.
 
I don't know if they are innocent or guilty ... but if there is evidence, from what I understand--other than the confession--it wasn't presented at trial. I'm talking about physical evidence, not witnesses that have now said they were pressured to say what they said, etc.

Personally, if that was the case why wouldn't they wait until December and then present it at the new trials, if granted? This whole deal makes me seriously think they do not have it.


I agree. They won a new trial and I would love to see ALL the new evidence the defense has found......
 
If the Judge threw out some of the evidence when they did the appeal and were granted a new trial and they then decided to plea guilty to a lesser charge via Alford plea, then that means that the Prosecutor has other evidence and the defendants are pleading guilty to a lesser charge.

This does not mean they are innocent, just that the state has the evidence to convict them, but they (defendants) don't want to go to trial.

They are being let go possibly because they have served enough time on the lesser charges.
 
I think we were spoiled in the CA case where were right in the courtroom the entire time. Now we have nothing, not even tweeted updates.

Just came back from my third "special break" and didn't miss anything. :floorlaugh:
 
I don't know if they are innocent or guilty ... but if there is evidence, from what I understand--other than the confession--it wasn't presented at trial. I'm talking about physical evidence, not witnesses that have now said they were pressured to say what they said, etc.

Personally, if that was the case why wouldn't they wait until December and then present it at the new trials, if granted? This whole deal makes me seriously think they do not have it.

BBM.

IMO the state would never let them out if they didn't have solid proof that they convicted three innocent men. They have physical evidence but that evidence implicates other men not the three kids who spent 18 years behind bars for a crime they didn't commit.
 
Doors are being held open and people are taking pictures.
 
Now everyone is moving. Maybe they're coming out another entrance from where CNN has their camera set up.
 
My question....if the DA has evidence to convict AGAIN in a new trial....why are they allowing these 3 to walk?? I swear....our children are just not a priority in this country. All a child killer needs is media and celebrity recognition and DA's and juries back down and swoon over the killer!! Why????

rant over...I'll leave the celebration of 3 convicted killers who will now agree to guilt be set free to party with the media, celebrities and their fans. Their 3 little victims will join precious Caylee and Jon Benet, etc. as ones who didn't get justice here on earth because they couldn't compete with their killers supporters. I'll never understand...
 
If the Judge threw out some of the evidence when they did the appeal and were granted a new trial and they then decided to plea guilty to a lesser charge via Alford plea, then that means that the Prosecutor has other evidence and the defendants are pleading guilty to a lesser charge.

This does not mean they are innocent, just that the state has the evidence to convict them, but they (defendants) don't want to go to trial.

They are being let go possibly because they have served enough time on the lesser charges.

Your post makes sense to me but that would mean they were somehow involved in the murders of the 3 boys? Why would celebrities and the public be happy about them going free? My understanding is they think they have been exonerated but yet they're pleading guilty.

Still confused.:fence:
 
BBM.

IMO the state would never let them out if they didn't have solid proof that they convicted three innocent men. They have physical evidence but that evidence implicates other men not the three kids who spent 18 years behind bars for a crime they didn't commit.

I don't think that's what's going on here. The DNA found to be the step-father which would be normal wouldn't it.

The appeal threw out some evidence, but the state has enough evidence to convict them and taking the alford plea the defendants agree and chose to take the plea instead of a jury trial. This does not mean they are innocent.

It means they have possibly served enough time for their plea. Could now be 2nd degree murder.
 
My question....if the DA has evidence to convict AGAIN in a new trial....why are they allowing these 3 to walk?? I swear....our children are just not a priority in this country. All a child killer needs is media and celebrity recognition and DA's and juries back down and swoon over the killer!! Why????

rant over...I'll leave the celebration of 3 convicted killers who will now agree to guilt be set free to party with the media, celebrities and their fans. Their 3 little victims will join precious Caylee and Jon Benet, etc. as ones who didn't get justice here on earth because they couldn't compete with their killers supporters. I'll never understand...

All criminals can plead guilty instead of going to trial that is their choosing. They can select a jury trial, a bench trial or plead guilty.

The alford plea is one in which the state has enough evidence to convict them and they (the defendants) would rather just plea guilty.

Now, if the lesser charge is Murder 2nd degree, it's possible that they have already served enough time to be released.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
69
Guests online
3,697
Total visitors
3,766

Forum statistics

Threads
594,227
Messages
18,000,626
Members
229,342
Latest member
Findhim
Back
Top