Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
There probably will be; but jury findings of fact are entitled to a good deal of deference on appellate review, and given that there is considerable circumstantial evidence tying him to the crime, along with the testimony of an eyewitness (who was found as a fact to be telling the truth when she said Rafferty did it and to be lying when she said he didn't) I think it's unlikely that this verdict will be overturned.
Sometimes the justice system works very well. It's not perfect, and it's rarely pretty, but this is one of those times that we should all just agree that the court got it right and not obsess over the minutiae of what evidence did and didn't get in.
|
Yep. Surely the defence will try and appeal this, but there would have to be a pretty major error in law for leave to appeal to be granted. The jury's emotions have nothing to do with it - we only have to worry if the judge screwed something up. And his tossing of the computer evidence shows that he took a pretty even-handed and careful approach to this stuff.
The judge's erring on the side of caution with his ruling on evidentiary issues could be what saves this case from a retrial. Now wouldn't that be ironic?
