- May 4, 2012
- Reaction score
Ok, so I have been poking around social media to 'gauge' the feeling re the evidence presented thus far. I have to say many people are saying they wouldn't convict unless they hear some 'hard' evidence and so far everything can be explained. Sadly I think people are looking for 100% proof which doesn't actually happen - and I am hoping that the jury has enough reason to look at ALL the circumstantial evidence to see how damning it is and not want proof positive for a guilty verdict.
Consider, if he gets off:
He get full custody of the girls
He gets all the money
He will probably sell his story to the media for $$$$$$$$$
He will probably ensure the Dickies never see the girls again
He may sue to get the rights to the girls' donation funds
What do you think?
I think that a lot of people making comments on social media don't know as much as the jury does! They probably don't have a great understanding of how the system actually works either. I mean, most of us can cast our minds back a few years and that was us I think it's fair to say that us WS'ers have an above average understanding of our judicial system.
The jury are listening to days and days of evidence, taking notes, reading transcripts at night, taking in the demeanour of the accused when certain evidence is shown and spoken of, watching the witnesses and forming opinions of their credibility, so on and so forth!
I can't really see (or can't allow myself to see) him getting off. I'm just not sure if it's my gut or my head telling me that though.
Hugs to everyone, it's going to get very emotional and stressful in the coming weeks!