Quote:
Originally Posted by Monahammer
Im confused as I don't see why anyone benefits from ascertaining EM's purpose or goal in proceeding with the court case.
The court case is complete. If she elects to appeal the case (stated as unlikely at this point) then maybe it deserves discussion. But otherwise, IMO, it's just being pointlessly hyperfixated on this matter.
There are some things we will never know, and we have to accept that we don't need to know or maybe deserve to know. We don't need to know EM's intentions.
The judge has determined that the prosecution did not meet the standard for proving guilt on any claim. Further, it is a fact that the judge felt warranted to mention that they found EM's testimony unreliable, and that EM was not credible on the stand.
Those are pretty pointed statements from the judge. I would feel remiss if I didn't point out that those who are most acidiously attacking that statement and coming up with invented rationalizations for why EM needed to pursue this are also those that take abnormally strong and hyperfixated views on many other subjects inappropriately. Probably best to ignore their "Participation".
|
Again, it bears repeating: EM did not bring this case. She cannot decide to appeal. This is the Crown's case.