#1
|
|||
|
|||
Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilty?\")
This stuff doesn't usually bother me, but this is just so over the top. From this article:
[ QUOTE ] DARLINGTON, South Carolina (AP) -- A jury has acquitted a convicted sex offender of charges he raped two teen girls in an underground bunker. The jury found Kenneth Glenn Hinson, 48, not guilty not guilty of kidnapping, sex crimes and assault with intent to kill. Hinson wiped his eyes and mouth and appeared to cry after the jury read its verdict, which followed about four hours of deliberations over two days. "I think the verdict says it all," he said as he was escorted from the courtroom. Authorities had charged that Hinson snatched the 17-year-old girls from their bedroom last year and dragged them one at a time to the underground room hidden beneath a tool shed, where he raped and bound them with duct tape. Prosecutors said Hinson expected the girls to die because the room had no air supply. However, Hinson testified during the six-day trial that the girls had consensual sex with him. He said they made up the story so they would be able to take drugs from the underground room, which he used to store marijuana. [...] If convicted, Hinson had faced a mandatory life sentence without parole under the state's two-strikes law because he was convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl in 1991. [...] Defense attorney Rick Hoefer spent much of his nearly two-hour closing argument Sunday picking apart what he called inconsistencies in the teens' testimony, including how long it took them to call 911 after their alleged escape and whether they saw Hinson with a gun. Prosecutors said any discrepancies in their stories might have been a result of the trauma the teens went through. "We are shocked and stunned. We believed Mr. Hinson was guilty as charged. We still believe he is guilty as charged,' said Attorney General Henry McMaster, who helped prosecute the case. Hinson remained in custody on a federal firearms charge because he allegedly had a gun when he was arrested. Convicted felons are not permitted to carry weapons. [/ QUOTE ] Apparently his testimony was more persuasive to the jury than that of the girls or the arguments of the prosecution. Nice job, Mr. Attorney General of South Carolina! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilt
Wow, that's pretty sickening.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilty?\")
I was thinking the same thing. Scary what good lawyers can do.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilt
So what do people get for raping 12 year olds these day? Maximum he could've gotten was 15 I guess?
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilt
Ummmmm, so?
Isn't it possible that the man is actually innocent and that the prosecution had a weak case based on not much more than the accused's criminal history? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilt
[ QUOTE ]
Wow, that's pretty sickening. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I too find it repulsive that a jury of 12 citizens, after listening to all the available evidence, did not find the accused guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. The quoted news story adds nothing to make me believe I am in a better position to judge this than those inside the courtroom. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilt
Unlike the Federal Rules of Evidence, the South Carolina Rules lack Rule 413, which makes prior convictions for sexual assault admissible in later sexual assault cases. So, the fact you highlighted was probably not presented to the jury. If so, they're probably completely horrified now that they've found out.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilty?\")
This was in South Carolina and the 48 year old defendant admitted to having sex with 17 year old girls. If it were so clear that he was guilty, then I bet the jury would have found him guilty.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilt
[ QUOTE ]
So what do people get for raping 12 year olds these day? Maximum he could've gotten was 15 I guess? [/ QUOTE ] I actually just saw a show about some rape trial. Guy had a few priors and he got 50-life for raping some 23 yr old and an additional 11 years for assault cause he broke her jaw. So I'd say considering this guy had a prior rape conviction he was gonna go away for life if convicted. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Now THAT\'S a defense attorney (aka, \"How was this shmuck not guilty?\")
"Underground Weed Bunker of Terror" in theaters May 17th.
|
|
|