Neutiquam
-“The facts were that a legal process determined by years of democracy was carried out”
Years of democracy doesnt make it right. ITs not like it is a sytem that is reevluated and fixed, it hasnt chnaged in quite some time, is arguably antiquitated and most of the Western world has dropped it.
-“it would have been even less likely he would be found guilty of a crime.”
I have no problem with that
-“You believe the Jury was wrong. It’s possible, I’ll grant you that”
Hence the protest, Now I think we agree more than we disagree. The discussion began over wether those who protest deserve police protection, You from the start agreed protest was accepable and now concede tha the Jury may have even been wrong! (Which arguably would demand for protest)
-“you have gone from calling it murder to manslaughter over the last few posts”
My view hasnt chanegd I just shifted from using a coloquial expression to legal as per your request. (I dont think i said manslaughter, it isnt manslaughter , I’d call it negligent homicide)
-“We have both got our colouring of the case from the media.”
I dont care for the media they have 24 hours of news o fill and their almost necer is 24 hours of news so they make stuff up to fill most of the time. I got my view on this case from watching the incident myself.
– you keep asking for a better system. I dont think that is my responsobility, but at your insistence sure! here is an idea lets screen out potential biased grand jurors. A reform that has been called for for years and now is being spoken of again thanks to this very case, and the PROTESTS that followed.