• UmeU@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    They did NOT establish definitively that it was self defense.

    The verdict established that the murders were not premeditated, which they weren’t.

    For the charge of 1st degree murder the prosecution had to prove premeditation which they were unable to do, hence the not guilty.

    For some inexplicable reason, the prosecution failed to also charge 2nd degree, which would have likely received a guilty verdict.

    Please note the distinction: while the defense certainly argued self defense, the not guilty verdict does not prove the defense theory to be correct, it simply proves the prosecution did not meet their burden of proof regarding premeditation, nothing more.

    In the US legal system, people are not proclaimed innocent, they are found to be guilty or not guilty. Not guilty of one particular charge does not mean that the defendant is innocent of all crimes.

    I watched the entire trial.

    • TheFonz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yes. thank you. I agree with your take for the most part.

      I’ve spent the whole thread defending how left I am so I’m out of energy to offer a more complete response. I have some thoughts but maybe I’ll come back later.

      Thanks anyway.

      Cheers.

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’ve spent the whole thread defending how left I am

        Why? You should be spending the thread defending your argument. This is just an Ad Hominem fallacy with extra steps.

        • TheFonz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          You’re right. I don’t really disagree with what you’re saying. I spent a lot of my energy arguing with the wrong individuals in this thread and I’ve run out of steam. I’m feeling a bit demoralized by the whole thing in general tbh. I’m happy you were able to get a debate bro term in I guess…

          Ad-hominem ftw!

          • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            “you’re right, I agree with what you’re saying, and now I’m going to try to throw in a random insult for no reason because I am arguing in good faith!”

            You were so close to just having a reasonable reply, you just had to stop one sentence sooner.

            • TheFonz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              Sorry I mentioned the Ad-hominem thing. 😕 I shouldn’t have brought it up.

              • YeetPics@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 month ago

                You shouldn’t have entered the fucking comment thread and that didn’t stop you.

                Expecting a lot more braindead shit from you in the coming weeks. Not expecting anything from your account after November.

                • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I’m really sorry my questions offended you. Seriously. I will mostly keep to myself going forward on this platform and just lurk after today. I think it’s clear that discussion is not welcome here.

                  Again, really sorry for being here and asking questions or trying to discuss a topic - albeit a charged one.