Molestation jurors: Did we get it wrong?

[QUOTE who="Stressed "Although he may be innocent"...****? He was found to be guilty. Cant be both. I hope he rots to death in jail, then goes to hell, where he is raped hourly, for eternity.[/QUOTE]

Yes he was found guilty, however a few of the jurors think they may have made a mistake, it happens. There are numerous innocent people in jail for crimes they did not commit, just as there are several cold blooded murders out on the streets, supposedly "innocent". It can very much be both...

Reasonable doubt, you are just wrong. i like how you "cherry pick" the facts.

"I'm aware he was convicted, but the article is about how the jury didn't agree that there was enough evidence to convict him. NO, ONLY 3 JURORS DID, NOT THE JURY>

"THE REASON THEY VOTED GUILTY WAS TO SPARE THE LITTLE GIRLS FROM HAVING TO TESTIFY AGAIN. no, only 3 claimed something close to that, 9 others didnt, they said they all agreed, and they did as he was found guilty.

"The prosecution cherry-picked pictures of these girls, and acted like the man only took pictures of them. IF A PIC IS SHOWING A PROVOCATIVE POSE, ITS PROVOCATIVE WHETHER CHERRY PICKED OR NOT, AND IT MUST HAVE BEEN AS THEY CONVICTED BASED ON THEM

"but the girls admitted to posing themselves for them. SO, HE HAD POWER OVER THEM, JUST LIKE ALL GOOD MOLESTERS, THEY DID AS HES ASKED AND DIDNT TELL MOM UNTIL AFTER THEY WERE TAKEN.

"You're right, where the hell were these girls' parents??? Way to dump your kids off and bail.
YOUR HALF RIGHT HERE, HAVING BAD PARENTS DOESNT MEAN YOU DESERVE TO GET MOLESTED, OR IS THAT WHAT YOUR IMPLYING?

YOU SEEM TO FEEL THAT THE GIRLS PAREMTS ARE AT FAULT AND SO THE MOLSETER GET OFF, BECAUSE OF BAD PARENTING? YOUR A SICKO DEFENDING THIS CREEP/CONVICTED MOLESTER. TELL YOU WHAT Miss Reasonable doubt, i will make you a challenge to see if you feel this way only while hiding behind your fake screen name. i will post my full name and phone number, if you will do the same. then we will see who stands behind there statements. you arent ashamed of your postings are you? you wouldnt mind all to see you support a convicted child molester, would you? im waiting........

Mr Smithster wrote:

i will post my full name and phone number, if you will do the same. then we will see who stands behind there statements. you arent ashamed of your postings are you? you wouldnt mind all to see you support a convicted child molester, would you? im waiting........

WOW. This from a guy who hasn't even signed up on Topix to set a permanent screen name.
Can anyone say "cyber-stalker"? I mean, not that YOU are a cyber-stalker; you sound perfectly calm and rational. But I'm sure ~other~ people would love to get names and numbers.

Mr Smithster I feel very sad for you and will be praying for your cold hardened heart to be warmed and softened. I pray Grod will help you through whatever is causing your raging judgementalism, and inspire you to be more loving.

three jurors wrote:

In separate interviews, they all expressed a feeling that there just wasn't enough evidence to convict Senter, 74, of the two counts.

But all three said that, in the end, they went along with the majority to avoid a hung jury.

They were persuaded to reach a verdict, they said, because they wanted to spare the two young girls from having to testify at another trial - even though they really weren't sure they believed them.

So these are the idiots upon whom the jury system is based. If they were unsure about Senter's guilt they were supposed to have voted Not Guilty. That's what the judge told them to do. The jurors were NOT to consider anything else. They were NOT to worry about the consequences of a hung jury and whether or not the two girls would be required to testify. They were only to decided if there was some reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case.

The jurors were paid for their time but they appear not to have done their job.

ao by the sea wrote:

Just curious, does anyone know the title of the Topix Thread title which should be the same as the DB concerning the story the lady juror was referring to ?(Oct 28. "they felt worse reading in the Daily Breeze that Senter took and passed a lie detector test") Did the DB run a story after Oct. 28 TH ? A Little help out there please.

I believe the jurors must have read the articles online after the verdict,hence reading about the lie detector test.

Mr Smithster wrote:

Reasonable doubt, you are just wrong. i like how you "cherry pick" the facts.
"I'm aware he was convicted, but the article is about how the jury didn't agree that there was enough evidence to convict him. NO, ONLY 3 JURORS DID, NOT THE JURY>
"THE REASON THEY VOTED GUILTY WAS TO SPARE THE LITTLE GIRLS FROM HAVING TO TESTIFY AGAIN. no, only 3 claimed something close to that, 9 others didnt, they said they all agreed, and they did as he was found guilty.
"The prosecution cherry-picked pictures of these girls, and acted like the man only took pictures of them. IF A PIC IS SHOWING A PROVOCATIVE POSE, ITS PROVOCATIVE WHETHER CHERRY PICKED OR NOT, AND IT MUST HAVE BEEN AS THEY CONVICTED BASED ON THEM
"but the girls admitted to posing themselves for them. SO, HE HAD POWER OVER THEM, JUST LIKE ALL GOOD MOLESTERS, THEY DID AS HES ASKED AND DIDNT TELL MOM UNTIL AFTER THEY WERE TAKEN.
"You're right, where the hell were these girls' parents??? Way to dump your kids off and bail.
YOUR HALF RIGHT HERE, HAVING BAD PARENTS DOESNT MEAN YOU DESERVE TO GET MOLESTED, OR IS THAT WHAT YOUR IMPLYING?
YOU SEEM TO FEEL THAT THE GIRLS PAREMTS ARE AT FAULT AND SO THE MOLSETER GET OFF, BECAUSE OF BAD PARENTING? YOUR A SICKO DEFENDING THIS CREEP/CONVICTED MOLESTER. TELL YOU WHAT Miss Reasonable doubt, i will make you a challenge to see if you feel this way only while hiding behind your fake screen name. i will post my full name and phone number, if you will do the same. then we will see who stands behind there statements. you arent ashamed of your postings are you? you wouldnt mind all to see you support a convicted child molester, would you? im waiting........

Umm....Mr.Smithster, it sounds like you saw the alleged pictures. Were you in the courtroom? Just curious....

Mr Smithster wrote:

"There is no way that anyone in their right mind would even think of condoning the conduct of this young man."
FYI, the "young man" is 74 years old!

LMAO, maybe the person that posted that is in their 90's!

A Child of God wrote:

Mr Smithster I feel very sad for you and will be praying for your cold hardened heart to be warmed and softened. I pray Grod will help you through whatever is causing your raging judgementalism, and inspire you to be more loving.

I pray for you bleeding heart liberals everyday! I pray that you will all just disappear with the illegals, child molester/rapist, gangbangers and all the other trash in the streets!

Why did you change your name?