Reply With Quote
wow... Whottt on the wrong side of yet another argument... SHOCKING!
Conviction was based on "proof beyond a reasonable doubt".
Following is the legal definition of that phrase:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...asonable+DoubtThe term connotes that evidence establishes a particular point to a moral certainty and that it is beyond dispute that any reasonable alternative is possible. It does not mean that no doubt exists as to the accused's guilt, but only that no Reasonable Doubt is possible from the evidence presented.
Seemed to me that based on the totality of the evidence presented, there should have been reasonable doubt in this case.
Last edited by jochhejaam; 02-09-2009 at 07:52 AM.
wow... Whottt on the wrong side of yet another argument... SHOCKING!
You know, there should be a law where the government gives you back your money if they force you to hire a lawyer only to eventually dismiss the charges.
I never said she should be absolved, but the primary onus is on the authorities who, understanding the emotional trauma a rape victim has gone through and the possibility that her judgment may not be 100% sound, should have explored all of the evidence instead of taking her word as gospel. They are more responsible than she is.
Texas justice at work. Wrong man in prison, dies in prison, then found innocent. Very nice. /sarcasm
Whottt would say he'd rather be the dead guy.Gitmo's youngest inmate: Terrorist or confused kid?
Omar Khadr, the youngest inmate and only Westerner held at Guantanamo Bay, is charged in the 2002 death of a U.S. soldier. President Obama's order to close the detention facility at Gitmo, however, has left his case in limbo. Like the other 245 Gitmo detainees, Khadr, 22, could be tried in the U.S. and face a life sentence. Or, as a Canadian citizen, he may be sent back to Canada, where he could avoid trial and be set free.
Do you KNOW what they do to detainees at Gitmo?
It's so unfair!
True, everyone knows women are stupid and emotionally unstable. How dare they give her positive ID any credence. Best to make that decsion for her.
And how dare they not just put the actual perpetrator in the lineup for her to ID. What sort of games are these guys playing?
I mean they have a job to catch criminals, how dare they actually produce suspects? Idiots.
I'm solld, you guys have convinced me.
A positive ID from a rape victim is going to mean jack to me if I am ever on a jury trial. I won't even consider it relevant, even if she's under oath, and swearing up and down that's the guy who raped her, no matter how much empathy I may have for the crime that was commited against her. I'll remember that she's traumatized and could be perjuring herself because of that.
After all, even if she's swearing under oath that she was raped by a person and is identifying the rapist, she could be emotionally unstable and therefore a complete ing idiot, with no idea who actually raped her, but is still going to make a positive ID. I mean after all, she is a woman, they are unreliable to begin with and you know how they get after they get raped.
Point made and excuse understood.
It's unfortunate this completely innocent man was imprisoned and died because she falsely ID'ed him multiple times and including under oath, but hey, let's not lose sight of the big picture here, she was raped! And that's what really matters.
Everything else is secondary, including this man's entire life.
Last edited by whottt; 02-10-2009 at 02:47 AM.
1. You need to learn the difference between a criminal act and a war.
2. You voted for Bush in 2004, how dare you bring this up?
What you don't seem to realize is that when this was speaking to the actual rapist...
She didn't mention a single ing word about the innocent man she sent to his death...all she was talking about was finally getting the guy who raped her.
She said she'd work on forgiving him, when the rapist has clearly repented by cofessing to his crime...
Work on forgiving him? This needs to be in line right with him on that whole asking for forgiveness thing...and she needs to learn how to forgive real quick seeing as how she commited an act that is exponentially worse than rape. It's called false imprisonment, perjury, and murder.
Death, not rape, is the worst thing you can do to another person. Do you not understand this or what?
Let me make this clear to you just so you understand how far apart we are on this stupid ing ho...
I hope she gets dry cornholed against her will all day every day for eternity, in . Until the first words out of her mouth to anyone that raped her being caught are about the man she sent to his death, and not about her stupid ass having the power(because he confessed of his own free will).
I hope his family comes to their senses and sues this ing penniless to where she wishes she was dead every day for the rest of her life.
To you it may be a big deal...to me it will merely be "unfortunate". I mean atfer all...HE DIED.
Last edited by whottt; 02-10-2009 at 03:04 AM.
By the way...the completely incompetent US justice system reminds me of cars...
Stupid justice system gives credence to victim ID's of accused perpetrators...and those stupid cars go actually go where the drivers tell them to. What we need is a justice system that totally ignores victim ID's...and cars that don't go where drivers drive them.
And how brave is this incredibly strong woman...after the DNA evidence clears Tim Cole's name, after the rapist confesses to the crime, after the family asks her for help, she's right there fighting to get his name cleared, inspite of the whole sending the guy to prison thing.
Heroic.
Yes the justice system failed, yes prosecutors place too much emphasis on getting conviction and not assessing actual guilt, ditto for police...
And whoever ignored the rapists confession letters needs to go to prison.
But the bottom line is that this woman positively ID'd an innocent man as a rapist. She did it multiple times, she did it under oath, she did it knowing full well that the man was going to prison for rape. There is no way she could have been positive that this was the man that raped her, because he was not the man who raped her, yet she did it anyway.
Pray that if you are ever suspected of a crime that you don't have an idiot like this stupid ing playing a role in deciding your fate. Because if you suddenly find yourself in front of a jury, with a person like this as your accuser, your entire life is about to turn into a big pile of . And no justice system in the world will protect you(except for perhaps an Islamic one, which I have newfound respect for after this case).
She was going to send someone to prison because she got raped...period. And you can hear it in the words she spoke to that rapist. Someone was going to pay, whether they were actually the person that raped her or not. Tim Cole was just "unfortunately" in the wrong place at the wrong time....there was something about him she just didn't like, and she "had the power".
her.
She's more of a criminal than the actual 4 time rapist is...and she's less repentant as well. And she's also partially responsible for those other rapes.
And she doesn't really care either...if she did the first words out of her mouth to the rapist would have been about the innocent man who died...and not her, "having the power".
Last edited by whottt; 02-10-2009 at 03:45 AM.
It's better for the guilty to go free than for the innnocent to be wrongly imprisoned. Always. Without fail. 100% of the time.
It is far more than simply "unfortunate" when an innocent person goes to prison, it completely defeats the purpose of a court and prison system.
Always better for the guilty to go free than for the innocent to go to prison.
There is no way in this woman was 100% certain that Tim Cole was the man who raped her.
How much more so then for false executions?
You can't possibly know this. You just assume it.
I agree with this but too bad your philosophy isn't consistent.
I agree that there are often problems with eye witness testimony. People think they see things they may not have, people want to be "correct" (testify in a way that helps whoever they are testifying for) in their testimony, etc.
By ignoring victims IDs though, you undermine a good number of cases. For example, in aggravated sexual assault cases involving children, it's not uncommon for the ONLY evidence to be the word of a child identifying the accused as someone who penetrated them. In robbery cases, often all you have is the victim's identification of the robber on which to rely. It's a problem and I have no doubt that there are many innocent people sitting in prison as a result of this.
So . . . you've never been certain of something only to discover later that you were absolutely wrong?
Shall I go pull up some of your posts from October and November . . . ?
Oh snap.
.
Damn, Whottt, you are really hung up on the word "unfortunate" aren't you? My bad. It's ed up. Completely ed up. It sucks. It's beyond horrible.
Better?
And I say there's no way in the PA was 100% certain either. But they needed a conviction.
Why are you letting the authorities off the hook?
Last edited by Spurminator; 02-10-2009 at 11:38 AM.
.
Zing...
Sure, if we are talking about one innocent man going to prison and one guilty man going free. In that case, it is better to let the guilty man go free.
If you ask me, it is better for one hundred guilty men to go free than it is for one innocent man to go to prison. But one thousand? Five hundred? Two hundred? I don't know. At some point, you have to tolerate unfairness because the system will never be perfect.
What? False executions are exponentially worse. I'm not in favor of false executions so I'm not really sure why you think this is relevant.
Oh I can be 100% certain. She clearly saw her attacker and indentified someone else...unless they are identical twins there's absolutely no way she was 100% certain.You can't possibly know this. You just assume it.
As for Peabody's joke that gave you all so much amusement in a thread about an innocent man's death and imprisonment..
I'm laughing too...at the re ed sense of right and wrong that fogs your minds.
Go ahead and dig up anything you like Peabody...but just be sure to dig up the part where someone went to jail and died because I was wrong about a prediction(read: an event that had not happened yet as opposed to a wrong ID about an event that had already happened and in which the victim spent several hours with the perpetrator).
What you need to find is me being 100% certain that John McCain is the President now, that would be equivalent to the stupidity of this , and yourself for thinking that was in any way a clever analogy.
It's unfortunate that you elect to make excuses and view a man's death and wrongful imprisonment as a mere unfortunate by-product of the current legal system.
And I say there's no way in the PA was 100% certain either. But they needed a conviction.
Why are you letting the authorities off the hook?
I'm not. I'm 100% in favor of the prosecuting attorney seving time over this..difference is, no one is making excuses for him.
And there's only one person in this case besides the rapist that was there when the rape occurred....and unfortunately she's a complet idiot.
Ya'll need to watch some interviews with this and see some of her comments, it is obvious that she was going to send someone to jail.
In her own words what she told the rapist, "if I ever get out of this, you're going down".
Uh ...maybe you ought to waste a few of those precious braincells on what he actually looks like if you really mean that.
Someone was going to jail because she got raped...period.
This cares virtually nothing about the man she sent to his death...she cares about the fact that she was raped first and foremost.
her.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions