It is typical that I didn't have to say what trial. First I must say that I am so heartbroken that these circumstances happened to a sweet, beautiful, innocent child. My heart can barely stand it. I still have no idea what happened exactly. And in my opinion, the mass may never know. And that is a big point. God knows, someone else knows.
I have read the posts, the tweets, I have watched the news and many, many opinions on this trial. I even watched pieces of the trial.
I want to speak from a juror's point of view. I have been on several juries and it is not something one takes lightly. In the country we live in we depend on the trials. We trust in the trials, sometimes we don't agree, but there is a process we believe in, it is our base for justice. It, at one time, did away with lynch mobs. There is a reason we have court, judges, lawyers and juries. We may not always agree with what happens, but it is our way. The way that we as US citizens, law abiding citizens have chosen. We don't allow taking the law into our own hands, we cannot shoot the people we hate because of what we think they did. And even if we know what they did.
The statement of "you know she/he did it" doesn't fly with a jury. The prosecution has to prove it beyond reasonable doubt. That is a fact. "
The standard that must be met by the prosecution's evidence in a criminal prosecution: that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty."
Some people dodge jury duty. At a space of time in my life, I got called all the time. And every single time I got picked. I didn't try to get picked, I was missing my job for days and once, for weeks at a time. But they ask all the potential jurors a bunch of questions, I answered them and I got picked. One was a grand jury. And they weren't simple, a couple were considered controversial. As a juror, you have to do the job and there are rules to abide by. I, for one, did not take this job lightly. It is serious stuff to sit and listen for days or weeks to people talking, people lying, people affirming and swearing. To this side of the story and that side of the story. And then decide on someone's fate.
Bottom line is they have to prove the act, they have to present facts, a compelling case is not good enough. Presenting a theory is not good enough, you have to convince the jury, you have to prove your case.
If people of harsh opinion could put themselves in that juror's shoes, they would blast them less. You don't convict a person because everyone will hate you if you don't. There is a reason they sometimes sequester juries. You cannot allow yourself as a juror to allow hearsay or even person's character to taint the facts or lack thereof. You cannot convict on assumption of guilt or you feel like they must be guilty or it sounds like they could be guilty, odds are they are guilty, that would be wrong.
It is a huge responsibility to be one of those jurors. And pressure from the mass cannot be a deciding factor, not one bit.
Many times, persons have been convicted on assumption and years later DNA proved otherwise. I love the use of DNA, isn't DNA great!
No one is arguing that the guilty must be punished, but guilt must be proven, not felt. Circumstantial, possible, theoretic information is not proof. Burden of proof is on the prosecution, that is why the smart ones wait until they have irrefutable proof before prosecuting a case. In my opinion, the convicting evidence was long gone, deteriorated, missing. They gave a theory and circumstantial evidence a shot and it failed. I would guess they expected this as a posibility, seriously.
Am I sad that no one knows what happened, yes I am. But fact is we don't. And if I am a juror, I am not going to guess or assume.
A person may be crazy, irresponsible, and even a horrible mother or person in the minds of the mass. Murder wasn't proven, couldn't be proven. Do I think something is wrong with this girl, yes I do, very much so. Do I think she murdered her child, I don't know and what I think doesn't matter. I really don't know and that is the point here, we don't know and the evidence couldn't tell us what happened like it usually does. Therefore, we still don't know.
Not guilty means not guilty, was there foul play, yes, but she was acquitted. I hope someone doesn't feel they need to administer their own justice. It sounds like some want to, I am hearing a lot of vicious hatred spewing around. But that would be taking the law into their own hands, that would be breaking the law.
I like the suggestion of one person who posted, push for a law that would require a parent, legal guardian, responsible adult to have a set number of hours to report a missing child or they could be convicted of set charges... This would have produced one conviction in this case besides lying to officials.
That is a good idea.
That is what we do in America, we see a need for a law, we get after getting one set, so it will be in place when we need it. We see a bad law, we get after getting it changed.
It is hard to say be happy when a child has suffered so horribly. But try your best not to hate, you are the one that will be harmed by that. Remember hatred is like cancer, it is hard to get rid of before it consumes you.
Protect your babies, love your kiddos and try not to be the one to introduce them to hatred.
