Re: A few posts -- Panitz Murder Trial Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2 ]

Subject: Re: A few posts

Author:
Gina

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 16:29:27 06/04/02 Tue
In reply to: Jill D. 's message, "A few posts" on 08:56:44 06/04/02 Tue

I think anon. juror made it pretty clear she is not anti-Fieger. What troubles me is the notion that jurisprudence in the great state of Florida is SO anti-Fieger that (I'm paraphrasing) Panitz could NEVER be successful in the appelate court and will not be granted a new trial even if there is sufficient reason to do so. I, too, think that Ralf is guilty - and although I am a die-hard fan of Fieger I don't believe this was up to his considerable talents. From her statements after the first post, it seems the jury did give both sides a going over, and really didn't like either attorney's behavior in the court-room.

Also, however, I noted that the judge, in this juror's opinion, was very prejudiced toward the prosecution and I find that disgusting. It feels to me that the chips were stacked against the defense from the get-go and they might as well have phoned in their case because it wasn't going to make any difference in the outcome.

As for the Abraham trial; I watched (and taped) the entire trial. I thought the political aspect of it came through loud and clear to any interested viewer. The problem I had with the "party" was it came too little and too late after Geoff had initially really pushed hard on the "kid playing-with-a-gun-shooting-by-accident", which I found entirely credible. You know we hear all the time about how juries are NEVER supposed to issue a verdict designed to send a message. But, it appears from what you have said, and certainly you were in a position to know, that this is exactly what happened.

I am discouraged because I don't believe the judge in any case was ever supposed to act as a 13th juror. Here's two instances where it appears to me that is what went down.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]