ScarlettScarpetta
When the going gets tough, drink coffee
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2012
- Messages
- 12,690
- Reaction score
- 172
I am. I avoided all the pre-trial commentary because I wanted to watch the trial as it happened, with no pre-conceptions about it. I haven't even talked to my grown kid about it - he is in criminal law and has been a prosecutor and a public defender and we have always discussed cases and trials. But I didn't want his opinions on this one. I wanted to come into it like a juror would.
I was not impressed by the prosecution's case.
Me either and I wanted to be. After all the broohaha in the initial days and weeks after the event, I thought for sure they would be able to support M2. But I don't see it. I don't see a willful disregard for human life at all, I certainly don't see an act of ill will and avarice.
After looking at the evidence and using what the pros witnesses said, I find that Rachel puts TM at his dad's gf house and then he is 70 yards away again. And that shows an assertion on his part to me. He had something in mind.. Where I feel that GZ was really walking around in the dark where he was, near his car and waiting for Police when he was attacked.
It is the only way it works for me. I have tried it the other way.. GZ did not know where TM was going so if he was really following him he would have gotten him right there at the dad's gf's house. I think it proves that GZ was not following him closely at that point. He had lost sight of him as he said he did.
I want the prosecution to prove something else but they have not. They can not. So so far I could not vote guilty.
OMO