Quote:
Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson
Prax,
Would you really want the jury to take serious the testimony of a racist white man who has perjured himself in court?
In a trial, character is VERY important.
He assasinated his own character. He renderred himself useless to the Prosecution. He embarrassed his entire agency, maybe even police officers all over the country.
The jury could not convict OJ with the evidence presented because the Prosecution could not prove his guilt BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBT.
OJ could have walked if the trial had been held in Jackson, MS in the 1990's, as long as there were considerable doubts. With the police tampering with evidence, lying in court and notably racist, the Prosecution would lost that case anywhere in America where citizens are not concerned with ensuring that JUSTICE is served-- and that not at the expense of an innocent man.
|
You're confusing the issue, which was if the prosecution could validate the testimony of the detective then YES I want them to take what he said because it was validated. Whether the man is a racist or not is irrelevant.
Remember? You mentioned validating what he said. IF his testimony could be validated by the prosecution then it's valid regardless of this man's feelings towards other races
Threaded Mode
