This headline is misleading and inaccurate (a sadly common occurrence) because it leads the reader into thinking the court was out of its racist mind and allowed a miscarriage of justice. In fact, the higher court simply ruled that the lower court made an error and sent the case back to trial. So, this headline sucks. It has nothing to do with race; it has nothing to do with injustice for the victim, and it simply is a matter of making sure the rights of the defendant arent trampled. In all likelihood, with the original confession, physical evidence, and victim testimony, the defendant will be found guilty, but the lower court should not have rushed the matter and the news outlet shouldnt have tried to trick us into thinking a miscarriage of justice occurred. All the states evidence can remain--nothing has been excluded--and the higher court simply ruled that the court made the error. The higher court wrote: “We are profoundly sympathetic to the Commonwealth’s desire to shield [the victim] from the emotional discomfort likely to result from testifying,” the court wrote, “[y]et it is plain that this humane desire does not suffice as a matter of law to substantiate a claim of substantial prejudice.” That got buried at the bottom of the story. Hmmph.
Posted on: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 05:01:47 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015