
| Msg # 12499 of 12811 on ZZUK4448, Monday 8-17-25, 6:32 |
| From: NORMAN WELLS |
| To: ALL |
| Subj: Re: Ricky Jones... |
From: hex@unseen.ac.am On 17/08/2025 12:55, GB wrote: > On 17/08/2025 09:10, Pancho wrote: > >> So the question remains, why did Lucy Connolly plead guilty when there >> was a reasonable chance a jury would acquit her? > > The evidence against Lucy Connolly was very strong. There was no getting > away from the fact that she typed those words. She wasn't suggesting she > lent her computer to someone else, who impersonated her, for example. > So, I don't think there was any sensible defence. > > I think you are suggesting that, had it gone to trial, the jury might > have disregarded the very strong evidence and found her not guilty. That > is a possibility, but is it actually a 'reasonable chance'? It would be a perverse verdict she would have been gambling on getting. And the chances of that are very slim, especially if there's no precedent. > I honestly don't know. She'd have needed at least 3 jurors who decided > out of sympathy with her views to disregard their vows and acquit her. > Then, she'd have needed to repeat that trick at a retrial. And it's not quite as simple as, say, a secret vote of all the jurors with no discussion. The jury is instructed to come to a unanimous verdict after careful consideration of the case. It will only be allowed to come to a majority verdict if the judge is satisfied that they have tried and failed, and they can only come to no verdict in extremis after they have made all possible efforts. Considerable social pressure and reasoning will be brought to bear in the jury room on any small minority by the other members. And the minority may well change their minds and go along with the others to allow at least a majority verdict when they see that theirs isn't the only view and they're going to be outgunned anyway. > Would that chance be worth a 33% increase in the sentence if she didn't > pull it off? Well, it's actually a 50% increase. A sentence of three years could be reduced by a third to 2 years, but 3 years are 50% longer than 2. --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2) |
328,100 visits
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca