From: "Robert F. Nagel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I hate to be a skunk at the party, but it is never "bad news" when an > individual exercise his constitutional rights and he is not convicted of > serious crime because a jury of his peers is not unanimously convinced > beyond a reasonable doubt of his guilt. It would be far worse news if our > system of justice and rights failed us and someone was wrongfully > convicted. There is no allegation that the jury "wrongfully" failed to > agree on Sorum's guilt. The evidence was presented to them and they made > their decision. But they didn't make a decision. And if their deliberation was at all based on Eisenberg's statements, it's cause for caution. Both in June's Isthmus article and in the articles in the dailies following the hung jury, Eisenberg repeatedly makes a blatantly false statement, one on which the gravity of this case hinges. He continues to say (in one form or another) "It was just an accident." We all know that it's not. "Accident" hasn't been used by most involved agencies (with the notable, yet puzzling exception of the Madison Police Dept) for years, perhaps decades. And for the very opposite reason Eisenberg implies. If that was the thrust of Eisenberg's defense, and the jury bought it, I suppose you could say it was the prosecution's fault for failing to make it clear that they're _not_ called "accidents", that there is no such thing, but it still means justice is not served. --------------------- Paul T. O'Leary Desktop Insurgent Madison WI USA _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
