Respectfully, a case containing a preponderance of circumstantial evidence does not a death penalty case make.
That's how some of these folks found themselves in this situation:
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence
IMO
Great point! And as much as I feel that this case deserves the death penalty, I really believe there's too much circumstantial evidence to actually apply such a punishment, should he be found guilty.
And he just compared the dates when Zach mentioned they had no gun and when they actually found out Holly had been shot! Could that remove reasonable doubt for the jury? It does for me!
Nor did him not uttering a word, or going back inside to fully dress because it was "chilly" outside! And why didn't he run into those woods? Why didn't he at least give his mother's words that it wasn't Drew the benefit of the doubt?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.