Quote:
Originally Posted by cashman
Any reasonable person thats listened to the trial would say thats complete bullsh1t Eric
|
If there had have been a jury, and if I were on it, having listened to the evidence available, I would have voted "not guilty." You can't condemn a guy on circumstantial evidence and media speculations. There has to be hard evidence ... any "reasonable" person would require more proof than the prosecution offered ... and what they offered was speculative bs, nothing more.. That you might have preferred a guilty verdict is irrelevant. Even in South Africa, there is the presumption of innocence. The prosecution has to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that someone is guilty. They didn't do that.