No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
I wont break down all the evidence since I dont want to get in an extended argument but looking at what you posted, given what we know publicly there is room for reasonable doubt.
Here would be my counter arguments without going into detail.
The descripencies in photos released by police during the manhunt.
The bag that was ditched with suspicious reports of its contents.
The improper handling of the weapon.
Not saying these for sure indicate innocence just there is still room for reasonable doubt in the court of public opinion.
I agree, there is room for reasonable doubt, I do believe if they manage to throw the bag out of the evidence he will get his doubt. I just don't see them throwing the bag out.
I don't think there is room for a non-guilty verdict though. At minimum he will have stalking conviction, at maximum he will get murder conviction. Outside of the jury nullification I don't see a full innocent being done, but that will have to be done on both the state and federal cases.
To go back to your actual question though: Due to the publicly available evidence, I believe the older folk will have issue with if he goes free. I don't believe any fights will happen in regards to it, but it would be a clear abuse of process (in the eyes of the public). It would be like OJ Simpsons "If I did it" all over again.
It's a big reason why im firmly against the public getting involved with cases like this. It doesn't matter what the jury says, the general public thinks he did it, due to the amount of news given on the case. His battle won't end at the courts, he will have to fight that claim for the rest of his life and thats not fair to him if he is actually innocent.
The only way I can see the general public being ok with an innocent verdict, is if they make it absolutely clear that the evidence given to the public was embellished and not actually correct. That would be an insane turn of events though. If it ends up being a case of the evidence was thrown out/not being able to be used, or a jury nullification did somehow happen, people are going to complain and call it a systematic failure, regardless of cause or reasoning. Innocent until proven guilty is only correct in the court process. With current day media coverage you are guilty until proven innocent.