Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CT TV commentator: Unusual to have DP on weak circumstantial evidence

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 12:07 PM
Original message
CT TV commentator: Unusual to have DP on weak circumstantial evidence
:wtf: Up to the end Williams claimed to be innocent. It appears there was zero physical evidence, and the main evidence was testimony from snitches! Is this true? How could someone be sentenced to death under these circumstances??????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Angry Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. Welcome to Amerika and President Death
It's been done and done and done. On even flimsier evidence than that, and with mentally retarded folk too. Bush got a lot of practice killing during his time as governor of Texas. Over 150 executions:
http://www.truthinjustice.org/govdeath.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I recently heard that TX destroyed all old physical evidence from DP
Edited on Tue Dec-13-05 12:18 PM by MyPetRock
cases that resulted in convictions, after DNA started being used to overturn convictions. I am beyond horrified at this point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jim3775 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
3. I don't want to start an argument but I think the prosecutors proved
that Tookie bought the shotgun that killed the four people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. I know practically nothing about the case.
A conviction may have been warranted. But I agree with the Court TV person that the DP was unusual for a circumstantial evidence conviction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. HEre, read this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC