GreekChat.com Forums  

Go Back   GreekChat.com Forums > General Chat Topics > News & Politics
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

» GC Stats
Members: 329,746
Threads: 115,668
Posts: 2,205,146
Welcome to our newest member, AlfredEmpom
» Online Users: 4,350
2 members and 4,348 guests
LaneSig
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-21-2011, 10:31 PM
MysticCat MysticCat is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A dark and very expensive forest
Posts: 12,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by AOEforme View Post
So (just to make sure I am understanding this), SCOTUS will be able to evaluate if there was coercion, a mistrial, falsified evidence, etc. but not be able to evaluate if the prosecution actually proved guilt?
Close. SCOTUS will be able to review decisions of lower courts about these things to determine whether the lower courts committed some error or need to reconsider anything. This includes whatever may be in the record about the evidence offered at trial or the degree to which evidence might be questionable. Ultimately, this could include a finding such as that jury heard evidence that it should not have heard, rendering its verdict unreliable.

In such a case, the result is a new trial, so that a new jury can hear the proper evidence (assuming the prosecution doesn't drop the case), because only a jury can determine guilt.
__________________
AMONG MEN HARMONY
1898
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-21-2011, 10:32 PM
AOEforme AOEforme is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: With Germs and a Lack of Sleep
Posts: 1,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat View Post
Close. SCOTUS will be able to review decisions of lower courts about these things to determine whether the lower courts committed some error or need to reconsider anything. This includes whatever may be in the record about the evidence offered at trial or the degree to which evidence might be questionable. Ultimately, this could include a finding such as that jury heard evidence that it should not have heard, rendering its verdict unreliable.

In such a case, the result is a new trial, so that a new jury can hear the proper evidence (assuming the prosecution doesn't drop the case), because only a jury can determine guilt.
Thanks for the explanation.
__________________
My Heart will always be with Alpha Omega E.

LET'S GO BIG RED!
Let me teach you how to Bucky!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
O/T Prayers for an innocent Man Shot James News & Politics 22 12-13-2010 11:24 AM
Mom of Jackson's accuser pleads innocent to fraud Rudey News & Politics 0 09-06-2005 06:37 PM
Another innocent man freed Rudey News & Politics 11 06-22-2004 09:53 AM
Innocent ex-Guantanamo Bay detainee . . . moe.ron News & Politics 6 11-19-2003 10:17 AM
Guilty or Innocent? determined_one Sigma Gamma Rho 15 05-14-2002 10:38 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.