W.TN.Orange Blood
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2012
- Messages
- 125,759
- Likes
- 321,854
Where did they sympathize with the killer? Seems he was explaining legal strategy when it's a no doubt casethis is your MSNBC sympathizing with this POS
Opinion | Why Laken Riley's killer was always going to be found guilty
For all the political controversy surrounding Jose Ibarra, the case against him was always a simple one.www.msnbc.com
The tone of the piece is that guy never had a chance because he was an illegal and not because he actually killed an innocent person. That is how it read to me but I realize that's just my opinionWhere did they sympathize with the killer? Seems he was explaining legal strategy when it's a no doubt case
I think you took the title the wrong way. Nothing in there said he wasn't completely guilty and was going to be convicted. He explained that the lawyer knew the case was unwinnable and that's why he went to a judge trial.The tone of the piece is that guy never had a chance because he was an illegal and not because he actually killed an innocent person. That is how it read to me but I realize that's just my opinion
But for all the political controversy, the outcome of this trial was never in doubt.
The verdict was going to be guilty.
The sentence was going to be life without parole.
For the defense, this was a hopeless case. The defense did the best it could with bad facts. It almost surely knew it was going to lose. That’s probably why it requested a bench (judge-only) trial instead of a jury trial.
Defense attorneys might alternatively push for a bench trial because the evidence against a defendant is both overwhelming and horrific. That’s likely what happened here. The defense had no chance with a jury.