They have to have witnessed a felony or have immediate knowledge that it was. Whatever the last part means. You think they did?
They have to have witnessed a felony or have immediate knowledge that it was. Whatever the last part means. You think they did?
They claimed they did. The jury can't mind-read, so it's immediate reasonable doubt because no one lived to claim anything to the contrary. The jury deliberately ignored evidenciary standards.
It's the same reason that if someone yells "bank robber", and I see a guy sprinting out of that bank, there is no possible way to argue beyond a reasonable doubt that my claim that I suspected him of bank robbery is a false claim.
They claimed they did. The jury can't mind-read, so it's immediate reasonable doubt because *no one lived to claim anything to the contrary*. The jury deliberately ignored evidenciary standards.
It's the same reason that if someone yells "bank robber", and I see a guy sprinting out of that bank, there is no possible way to argue *beyond a reasonable doubt* that my claim that I suspected him of bank robbery is a false claim.
(post is archived)