"WE ARE HAVING DIFFICULTY REACHING A VERDICT BECAUSE THERE IS STILL AN UNCERTAINTY ABOUT "REASONABLE DOUBT" AS WELL AS THE EVIDENCE AND LACK OF EVIDENCE AND IT'S IMPACT ON "REASONABLE DOUBT".
Both sides agreed that a prudent course of action would be for the Judge to redefine the term "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" even though the jury hadn't asked him to do so.
As this note was read, Katehis had a devilish smile on his face, which made me want to vomit.
The Judge told the jury that reasonable doubt is an honest doubt about the defendant's guilt for which a reason exists based on the evidence. He said it had to be an actual doubt not an imaginary doubt. The prosecution was obligated to prove its case "beyond a reasonable doubt" not beyond all possible doubt. It's a doubt that a reasonable person might have when weighing a matter of this importance.
Needless to say, this note doesn't come as welcome news to Team Weber, although I've been told that while some inexperienced defense lawyers might be pleased with a note like this it often means that many on the jury are convinced of the defendant's guilt and it could be just a juror or two that has questions about it.
The fact of the matter is we must continue to wait and wonder.
No comments:
Post a Comment