The one thing that I am bothered with is that the jury will not speak about their decision. I think, that if you come to a verdict, be it guilty or innocent, then you should be able to stand behind your verdict and state why you voted a certain way. I'm not arguing that the jurors should be questioned, or mocked, or revered for their decision, but I think, in exchange for locking someone away for life (or letting someone free), they should be willing to divulge why they reached the decision they did.
I understand our system is not built this way, but I do think it is a flaw. I know there are many on here, who would have voted Guilty, and would have been able to state proudly why they did so. I would like to hear from the jury the reasons why they have sent a man away for life. Don't get me wrong, I think he is guilty, but it is a hard burden the jurors have, the power to decide this man's life. In exchange for that burden and that power, I think they should be willing to tell the world why.
On a separate note, someone asked in the old thread if there is any reversible error. I don't think Stephens is the type of Judge to leave much room for an overturn on appeal. I think that his most susceptible decisions would have been allowing in the evidence of CY's doll play, and the information on the wrongful death suit. I don't know that it will reach the level of reversible error, since I don't personally think either of those tipped the scales in favor of guilty (other things did that, would be my belief). So, these may be ruled "error", but I'm not sure they will be reversible if they are even error.
