Metropolis Reality Forums - This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry

Sponsored by: The Fans!

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Nov 25^th, 2024, 10:43am

Upcoming Premiere Dates:
Survivor 23, Season premiere
Thursday, September 14 (8:00-9:30 PM, ET/PT) on CBS

Metropolis Reality Forums Ť This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry ť

   Metropolis Reality Forums
   Off-Topic Forums
   In the News (Moderators: lakelady, yesteach, MediaScribe, Bumper, Isle_be_back)
   This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry

Previous topic | New Topic | Next topic »

Pages: all 1 2

Add Poll

Notify of replies

Send Topic

Author

Topic: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry (Read 563 times)

MzWings
ForumsNet Member

Praying for FN members/family health & happiness

Gender:

Posts: 0

This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« on: Nov 11^th, 2003, 6:33pm »

Quote

Modify

Jury Finds Durst Not Guilty of Murder

Durst appeared stunned when he heard the verdict from state District Judge Susan Criss

Tuesday, November 11, 2003

GALVESTON, Texas A jury on Tuesday delivered a stunning verdict of not guilty in the murder case of cross-dressing New York millionaire Robert Durst.

Durst was on trial for the shooting death of his 71-year-old neighbor, Morris Black (search), whose body was chopped up and thrown into Galveston Bay.

After five days of deliberation, jurors decided that the real estate heir did not murder Black, who lived across the hall from him in a low-rent apartment building.

Durst, 60, who is under suspicion in two other killings, testified in his own defense for nearly four days. He insisted that Black was shot accidentally during a struggle, and said that in a panic he then dismembered the body. The victim's head has never been found.

Durst appeared stunned when he heard the verdict from state District Judge Susan Criss, standing with his mouth slightly open and his eyes filling with tears. He hugged his attorneys afterward, saying: "Thank you so much."

In a news conference following the verdict, defense attorneys thanked the jury for not letting the sensationalistic details of the case affect their decision. And they said their client was truly sorry for what happened.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,102766,00.html

(I was more than a little stunned/shocked/disappointed angry that this case came to the end it did. Angry

)

IP Logged

"Senility Prayer"...God grant me...
The senility to forget the people I never liked
The good fortune to run into the ones that I do
And the eyesight to tell the difference."

azure
ForumsNet Member

Gender:

Posts: 4087

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #1 on: Nov 11^th, 2003, 6:50pm »

Quote

Modify

durst was arrested last year right near my house at a wegmans market, stealing a sandwich, he is a freaken millionaire and he is stealing a sandwich.

I cannot figure out how he was honestly proven not guilty. Seems quite suspiscious to me

IP Logged

HELLO EVERYBODY!!

MzWings
ForumsNet Member

Praying for FN members/family health & happiness

Gender:

Posts: 0

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #2 on: Nov 11^th, 2003, 8:00pm »

Quote

Modify

Year, after freaking year, case like this are called "not guilty" or "mistrail". This rotten excuse for a man admitted to blocking the memories of what he did. If you or I, the average Joe were on trial, we'd be zapped ASAP.

For instance - WTF is this:

N.Y. millionaire Durst not guilty of murder
Jurors say dismemberment was irrelevant
Tuesday, November 11, 2003 Posted: 6:11 PM EST (2311 GMT)

Tuesday, November 11, 2003 Posted: 6:11 PM EST (2311 GMT)

Robert Durst reacts as a not guilty verdict is read Tuesday. (November 11)

Robert Durst testifies a struggle for a gun caused Morris Black's death. (October 27)

GALVESTON, Texas (CNN) -- Jurors who on Tuesday acquitted eccentric New York millionaire Robert Durst in the killing of his 71-year-old neighbor, Morris Black, said they had to put aside the defendant's admission he dismembered Black's body and then fled because it was not part of the question they were told to decide.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/11/durst.verdict/index.html

I just don't know what to think or say - anymore! :cry2:

« Last Edit: Nov 11^th, 2003, 8:03pm by MzWings »

IP Logged

"Senility Prayer"...God grant me...
The senility to forget the people I never liked
The good fortune to run into the ones that I do
And the eyesight to tell the difference."

Bumper
ForumsNet Moderator
Moderator
ForumsNet Member

A Virginia Member of the RED SOX Nation

Gender:

Posts: 2946

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #3 on: Nov 11^th, 2003, 10:30pm »

Quote

Modify

Never under-estimate the ignorance of 12 people when you put them in a jury room. Roll Eyes

I'm not sure who said that,

. . . . maybe it was O.J.

« Last Edit: Nov 11^th, 2003, 10:32pm by Bumper »

IP Logged

If U R reading these old posts, know that we were once a great, active cyber-community, but as in all things..Time moves on. This is now a Ghost Town.

luci
ForumsNet Member

Gender:

Posts: 12045

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #4 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 9:14am »

Quote

Modify

The decision is past ridiculous! This is an embarrassment for our state! Wonder if someone got to the jury? Roll Eyes

IP Logged

"A friend is someone who knows the song in your heart and
can sing it back to you when you have forgotten the words."

david
Guest

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #5 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 9:29am »

Quote

Modify

Remove

Our Justice system maybe the best there is but it still has MAJOR FLAWS examples are this case and OJ case where 12 brainless idiots who probably still need help tieing thier shoes get to decide on important cases like this. I felt after OJ fiasco and still feel we need a "Professional Jury" not a bunch of fools! Lets face it most of us cant be on Juries because our jobs wont allow us time away or have us use our vacation time so Juries are picked out of the very few who can get time off and the MORONS left over. Really dismemberment not irrelevant my GOD!

IP Logged

luci
ForumsNet Member

Gender:

Posts: 12045

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #6 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 12:31pm »

Quote

Modify

David, I can and have been on a jury and I will say so myself, I made a dang good one! The culprit did not get away wit his wrong doings!
Some of us ordinary folks can do a good job as a juror. And we housewives and retired folks make good ones.

IP Logged

"A friend is someone who knows the song in your heart and
can sing it back to you when you have forgotten the words."

david
Guest

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #7 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 12:54pm »

Quote

Modify

Remove

I wasnt suggesting my comments applied to all my point is that it is very tough to get a real Jury of your Peers the way things are now most people cant take off work for long trials and a Jury of retirees i am sorry is NOT a Jury of ones Peers. My suggestion is that eith Court pays Jurors their full pay so they can afford to be on Jury or actually hire Juries from Jury pools if so these persons would have a better understanding of things I will make this statement one of the OJ Jurors was asked about DNA and his/her reply was "Lots of people have same blood type" now this is the kind of moron that doesnt need to be on a Jury! I am sorry if I offended you Luci that was NOT my purpose or point

IP Logged

Rhune
ForumsNet Administrator

Gender:

Posts: 292

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #8 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 1:12pm »

Quote

Modify

Part of the problem is that from what I have read, the lawyers get to pick and choose from the selection and narrow it down to people they feel will weight the case in their favor. I recall reading an article years ago in one prominent case where they talked about how people were selected. The lawyer for the defense talked about how he picked one person because they were an angry seeming person in the hopes that they would deliberately cause it to be a hung jury by not getting along with the other jurors, and the list went on and on like that. When I read about the whole process, I was just appalled.

IP Logged

Rhune
ForumsNet Administrator

Gender:

Posts: 292

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #9 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 1:20pm »

Quote

Modify

I went ahead and did some googling, and here's an article similar to the one I read, I suspect the one I read was the one by Adler that they refer to several time, but they make many of the same points in this article about how a jury is manipulated/selected.

http://reason.com/9502/dept.bkOLSON.text.shtml

IP Logged

david
Guest

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #10 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 1:26pm »

Quote

Modify

Remove

Which falls in line with my point Cool

IP Logged

Rhune
ForumsNet Administrator

Gender:

Posts: 292

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #11 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 1:35pm »

Quote

Modify

I'm sure there are time when the jury does not do what one side or the other expects. Like in Luci's trial, I suspect the defending lawyer would never have let her get picked if he'd seen messages in here and her voicing strong opinions on right and wrong. It's nice to know that despite all the manipulation that goes on in the jurly selection process, there are still people out there that do a good a job.

IP Logged

david
Guest

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #12 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 1:51pm »

Quote

Modify

Remove

AMEN

IP Logged

luci
ForumsNet Member

Gender:

Posts: 12045

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #13 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 6:44pm »

Quote

Modify

No David, not at all did I take your opinion to be offensive. In fact, I do agree with you. Too bad I was not on the OJ trial, for I do take my juror duty very seriously.

A good juror pays attention, weighs all the evidence and makes a vote accordingly.

My very first time to be a juror and I was called to Regional Court, for it was a banking case. They tell us to not discuss it and I didn't, not even with my husband. I was so concerned about making the right decision that I thought I was probably the only juror who felt this way. It was a fretful night for me and I woke up with a migraine headache, agonizing over this trial. I just wonder how many jurors care this much about voting and making the right decision for all involved. And I'm not saying that most don't take it seriously, just wondering how many do!

I wouldn't mind being a juror again, but was excused from one last year because the judge is my cousin and hse was next door in another courtroom. Little did the opposing attorney know that she would never discuss or advise me on how to vote at all, nor would I jeopardize her position by asking!

IP Logged

"A friend is someone who knows the song in your heart and
can sing it back to you when you have forgotten the words."

Bumper
ForumsNet Moderator
Moderator
ForumsNet Member

A Virginia Member of the RED SOX Nation

Gender:

Posts: 2946

Re: This.Makes.Me.SOOO.Angry
« Reply #14 on: Nov 12^th, 2003, 8:59pm »

Quote

Modify

Some of the blame for the decision of this jury must be laid at the feet of the prosecution. They went for an "all or nothing" type of prosecution. The jury was not allowed to consider a lesser offense such as murder in the second degree or manslaughter. I know that I said in an earlier post that the jury didn't make a good decision, but based on my experience with the law, we really can't second guess the decision of the jury. They made a decision ONLY on the information that was presented to them in sworn testimony. The burden of proof is on the prosecution and the defendant, however vile he may be, has the presumption of innocence. If the jury had doubts, then they are duty bound to return a verdict of not guility. Obiviously, the prosecution thought they had a better case than they actually had. The dismemberment of the body was not the cause of death and was therefore not considered by the jury in their decision of guilt or innocence of the actual charge of murder in the first degree. Once they bought the theory of a struggle over the gun and an accidental killing, murder one was out the window.

Did the system work? Yes, I think it did. Did the jury get it right? Well, that's a judgement call for those 12 laymen. Did that guy get away with murder? Well, if he did it now lies at the feet of a prosecution team that made an all or nothing decision.

IMO, this case is apples to oranges from the OJ case and I regret the quick, snappy comeback in my previous post. OJ DID get away with murder. THAT jury was presented with ample evidence of his guilt, but was distracted by an overload of sometimes too technical information.

IP Logged

If U R reading these old posts, know that we were once a great, active cyber-community, but as in all things..Time moves on. This is now a Ghost Town.

Pages: all 1 2

Add Poll

Notify of replies

Send Topic


Previous topic \| New Topic \| Next topic »