I am looking for SENIOR JUDGE

[seniorjudge]

Self defense was never an issue. I am saying that she did not commit this crime according to the lame evidence that was presented. Is that what you are asking?

Exactly.

You are saying that the evidence was lousy.

You are NOT saying that she did NOT commit the crime.

Big difference.

I didn't see the evidence.

So, I am outta here.

 

[mom in jail]

Senior Judge

But isn't a conviction supposed be beyond a shadow of a doubt? I am saying there IS doubt based on the evidence provided. How can a conviction be based SOLELY on a jail informants testimony?

 

[Silverplum]

But isn't a conviction supposed be beyond a shadow of a doubt?

No, it's beyond reasonable doubt. Big difference.

 

[mommyof4]

And just because YOU have reasoable (or not) doubt the evidence, that doesn't mean that the jury did. (or judge, depending on whether or not she had a jury trial).

 

[mom in jail]

Doubts

Shadow, reasonable......not a big difference when you are talking about a "jail-informant" that has made previous deals in other cases. The Defence attorney tried to discredit this informant but was not allowed to effectively cross examine per the trial judge

 

[fairisfair]

Shadow, reasonable......not a big difference when you are talking about a "jail-informant" that has made previous deals in other cases. The Defence attorney tried to discredit this informant but was not allowed to effectively cross examine per the trial judge

so he made previous deals in other cases. What type of a deal did he make in your mother's case???

 

[mommyof4]

Shadow, reasonable......not a big difference when you are talking about a "jail-informant" that has made previous deals in other cases. The Defence attorney tried to discredit this informant but was not allowed to effectively cross examine per the trial judge

Umm, yes there is a big difference. Beyond a shadow of a doubt means that everybody agrees that there is no way in Hades that the event occured as described. Reasonable doubt means that there is a chance that the event occured as described, but there are enough reasonable questions that it possibly/probablydid not.

 

[mom in jail]

Deals

Well the informant didn't do any time for check deception.

 

[mommyof4]

Well the informant didn't do any time for check deception.

That's because the DA was going for the bigger crime, and conspiracy to commit murder is a bit more serious than forging a check or petty fraud. It's a pretty easy deal to make.

 

[Silverplum]

Like I said...big difference.

 

[fairisfair]

Well the informant didn't do any time for check deception.

If she wasn't doing time then how was she a "jailhouse informant" ?? Did she say that your mother confessed to her while they were in jail, and then ADDITIONAL charges that were pending were dropped against the informant?? is THAT what you are trying to say?

 

[mom in jail]

Deals

So what you are saying is that (like I said) it was a pre-determined conviction based on severity of the crime. Of course it makes the state look better to have a conviction on Conspiracy to Murder that check deception?

 

[Just Blue]

Well the informant didn't do any time for check deception.

Why was your mother in jail? What was the motive according to the Prosecution?

 

[mom in jail]

Motives

The prosecuter said her motive was to prevent husband from taking custody of the minor children, but that was not the case. That is what the jail informant told the prosecutor. But like I said earlier, they were reconciling and that motive was disclaimed by her defense attorney.

 

[mom in jail]

Fairisfair

The informant was being held for trial of check deception. She had yet to go to court, that's how the deal played out.