102
this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
102 points (99.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13918 readers
775 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I didn't really follow this, but if a jury said not guilty isn't it at least somewhat reasonable to assume the evidence wasn't that strong? Or I guess the prosecution could have intentionally made a weak case, but idk
I figured he would go down hard as a scapegoat for the rest of the (white) people involved. Maybe Diddy had enough blackmail or something to wiggle out of it, but also I'm not quick to assume the jury got it wrong if they got to see evidence and hear testimony we didn't. I typically just trust a jury more than the prosecution, cops, government in general, etc.
That's what I've been hearing about the case. I haven't followed the nitty gritty too closely, but know people who do. The general consensus I've gotten is that the prosecution came under prepared for as big of a case as they're trying to make. I'm also assuming that they got less evidence than they would get out of court because individual evidence has to be stronger when you're in court (at least if the defense lawyer is any good).
Reminds me of Casey Anthony's trial. Everybody was so pissed at that jury because it was so obvious that she did it, but if you see the case the prosecutors made against her it becomes very clear very quickly why she was found not guilty.
In short, fuck cops
To my knowledge the Kyle Rittenhouse trial was like that too, as in the prosecutors messing up big time.
"Messing up" implies a lack of malfeasance.
Not to mention the judge not allowing them to show his social media posts about wanting to shoot people or tell the jury he beat up a girl at his school.