Originally posted by: CPA
I just read that the jurors still couldn't decide on the last two.
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: CPA
I just read that the jurors still couldn't decide on the last two.
only one they couldn't decide on was reckless manslaughter
:beer:Originally posted by: waggy
Now big question. How is he guilty on the other if there was no "crime"? oooh this should fun to see.
Originally posted by: classy
I agree with the verdict. This was an accident. He should be guilty of tampering with evidence and the like, but no way he meant to shoot and kill anybody. His fooling around with guns finally caught up with him. One of his friends said one day he almost accidently shot him. I think it was an unfortunate accident that turned for the worse.
Originally posted by: Zim Hosein
OJ wasn't found guilty either!![]()
Originally posted by: Marauder911
Money talks, 'nuff said. See OJ for reference.
Originally posted by: waggy
Now big question. How is he guilty on the other if there was no "crime"? oooh this should fun to see.
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Zim Hosein
OJ wasn't found guilty either!![]()
comparing this with OJ is just stupid.
Aggravated manslaughter was a ridiculous charge and they should never have charged him with it.
possesion of a weapon with criminal intent was just as stupid.
bottom line, he should have been charge with reckless manslaughter and evidence tampering, unfortunately the lesser charges really dont' carry much of a penalty without the reckless manslaughter charge.
the reckless manslaughter was a tough call and the jurors were hung.