View Single Post
  #77  
Old 05-27-2005, 01:10 AM
GottheTshirt GottheTshirt is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oklahoma USA
Posts: 111
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 5 Posts
Default You can't handle the truth!!!!!

Please forgive me, I am reminded of Jack's famous line.

The fact is, the evidence did not prove Scott committed a crime.

What got the man convicted was a s$$t that has since gone on to make a lot of money telling HER side of the story. Whatever that is.

Basically, people don't understand what discovery is or how it works. Fact is, there was a lot of exculpatory evidence on Scott's part. BUT, if the detectives don't reveal it to the D.A.'s office, it doesn't have to be given to the defense.

Such was the case here.

Whether he is innocent or guilty, I have no idea. What I DO know is that he should have never been found guilty of being a liar and cheater. That is not a crime. Perhaps he should have been charged with adultery.

I think it's a shame that a jury could be as deluded and D.A.-handled as they were. I would at least like to think the members of this forum would have minds of their own, and further, had Scott been tried by members of this forum, I think the worst that would have happened would be a hung jury.

Legally, I think he is innocent. Having a mistress does not make you guilty of murder.
Reply With Quote