These acquittals are usually unsound - there's groups that go around challenging old convictions on all sorts of bullshit ground just to prove some sort of point.
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING 2020 IV: Intravenous Soyposting
These acquittals are usually unsound - there's groups that go around challenging old convictions on all sorts of bullshit ground just to prove some sort of point.
DNA evidence u fucking mong...ur lack of compassion is disturbing.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING 2020 IV: Intravenous Soyposting
These acquittals are usually unsound - there's groups that go around challenging old convictions on all sorts of bullshit ground just to prove some sort of point.
If the Jizz found on said dead person doesn't match the person who is locked up for the crime...it doesn't necessarily mean he is innocent...it just means she could have fucked someone else earlier and the murderer used a joe bag.
if they found dna of someone else and she didnt fuck anyone else thst dsy then it does prove it moron especially if someone else admitted to it and it matched their fucking dna. its not rocket science.
And all DNA has to do is disprove one piece of evidence.
You could have 1000 reasons to convict, but when the judgement is made you cite specific items.
Throw any one of them into doubt, however slight, and the whole trial needs to be redone. No one is going to be able to do that for some crime that happened a long time ago, that's just not realistic.
they dont just release people on flimsy dna evidence reasons like the example you came up in your head just now. people like kamala harris fight to keep thrms itll locked up even with greater proof and lie or hide evdience.
Originally posted by Wariat
they dont just release people on flimsy dna evidence reasons like the example you came up in your head just now. people like kamala harris fight to keep thrms itll locked up even with greater proof and lie or hide evdience.
Are you waiting for DNA evidence proving you were unjustly convicted?
Imagine I mean just imagine if this was you. Have some empathy or be able to identify with others not jsut your upper clwss white privilege groups your mommy and daddy are a part of. its claled empathy and its a human trait everyone but you seem to have.
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING 2020 IV: Intravenous Soyposting
And all DNA has to do is disprove one piece of evidence.
You could have 1000 reasons to convict, but when the judgement is made you cite specific items.
Throw any one of them into doubt, however slight, and the whole trial needs to be redone. No one is going to be able to do that for some crime that happened a long time ago, that's just not realistic.
you know nothing about the court system or people like kamala harris in california and Amerikkka. I do. so kepe your opinion to the high class white people circles you frequent who have never bene in toruble or faced anything beyond a speeding ticket due to their privilege their entire lives.
Originally posted by Wariat
they dont just release people on flimsy dna evidence reasons like the example you came up in your head just now. people like kamala harris fight to keep thrms itll locked up even with greater proof and lie or hide evdience.
If people can be convicted falsely they can also be deemed innocent falsely.
no it twkes almsot nothing to comvict someone in Amerika jsut hearsay or one perosn saying somehting and lying or having a grudge. on the other hand it twkes much evidence not jsut innocence to be elt out ever.
