I'll be super clear when I say, The reason I find Zachary Adams GUILTY in this case is not because I am just trying to pin this on SOMEONE just because we need to find someone to do it.
I believe:
A). I am a critical thinker - yes, in opposition to a post here, you can believe ZA is guilty in this case and be a critical thinker at the same time. We are all of our own opinions.
B) you can be a woman, and not be emotionally drawn to "pinning" this crime on any random person (I would never do that.)
C) I hardly think these 4 were just chosen. They all implicated themselves (albeit I need to study Shayne's one time immunity revoked), but Dylan and Autry are absolutely clear. You don't make up that you were a part of a murder case just to see if someone will stick you with the death penalty or life in jail.
D) If you determine not guilty, you do have to consider multiple witnesses took the stand, saying ZA claimed guilt. I can't, in good conscious throw out all those witnesses testimony and think every convo Zach had with these folks is bragging. I don't buy that. Corey? Nope. If you are saying guilty you don't believe one of them. In addition to the fact that he said "no gun, no body" 4 months before she was found. I believe yes, that Zachary Adams was proud he did it. Even more reason he should not get away with a "not guilty".
B) IMHO, I believe Shayne took her ---not someone "other than the 4". This was corroborated by Candace, the Coon Hunt, he sketch drawn of him matching his picture and overall Clint's description. There is a bigger deal at play to me here as far as the actual abduction and these details don't have to be perfect to make me think he is less than absolutely guilty of the crime.
I will repeat that ----the details we don't have of the actual abduction part do not have to be there to make Zachary Adams guilty. There is enough corroborated evidence leading up to the abduction and after the abduction to convict.
C) I am praying this is not a hung jury. But with the passion expressed on both sides here, it seems there are some passionate folks on both sides.
If Zachary Adams walks, for me, it is as bad as OJ walking but worse because there are 4 individuals.
You replied to my post and some points I made. But you and others should be aware that I wasn't trying to take shots at anyone who sees this case differently from me. Instead, I was responding to a specific question that has since been erased from my post by the mods, which asked how could those who see the evidence as insufficient vote to not convict since there's no one else proven to pin it on, and is it a male thing to see the evidence as insufficient. Without the question, it kinda sounds like I was taking shots at those who see the case differently than me, or at women, and I was not.
"the details we don't have of the actual abduction part do not have to be there to make Zachary Adams guilty." ....Maybe true, but maybe not. I think we have to have details in which the abduction testimony matches the perps
somehow. And we actually have a significant conflict. The "size" of the abductor did generally fit Shayne (and a million others), that's true. But Clint got a good look at the guy (whoever he was) from behind, and was certain that he had long dark hair, which certainly wasn't the case with SA, and SA didn't have a car or truck either.
I understand that the specifics of the abduction itself is less important, but if the person who took HB that day CAN'T be one of the 4, then that creates all kinds of questions and doubts, and to me that can't be ignored. And meaning no disrespect, but to me the idea that some guy who could have been SA was acting creepy at a different event at a different time and place, is ludicrous (and simply wrong) to insert as an eyewitness identification of who took HB. All we know from a different day and time is who was perhaps seen a different day and time, but CLINT (and Clint alone) was the one who saw and described the person who took HB.
"They all implicated themselves" ...Did they? SA certainly did not. DA is assumed to have done so - then again, it's unknown exactly what DA said, and to whom and why. ZA said things that sounded like he did, but those are cherry-picked and it certainly wasn't some sort of actual confession.
"If Zachary Adams walks, for me, it is as bad as OJ walking but worse because there are 4 individuals." ....I think that's fair. But, to be clear, despite all the evidence, the prosecution was so incredibly inept that they did NOT prove OJ guilty despite having plenty of compelling evidence. I did watch that trial, and felt strongly that OJ had to have done it but that they couldn't convict with the way the evidence was presented. The jury did their job.
In this case, I don't think the evidence is nearly is strong. And I think the state did about as well as they could, with what they had. I actually agree that I don't want to see these guys on the streets, but I don't think there's been BARD here, so I'll support whatever the jury thinks is right.
