Rae Carruth

[Chuckus]

Being that I live in the town where all this brew ha ha is going on, does anyone have an opinion or do you care? I have no opinion really other than if he did it, he should be locked away for life (and not 20 years, the rest of his natural life) with no possibility of parole. Just curious.

 

[Weird Harold]

The verdicts smell of a juror who let their personal beliefs get in the way of finding the truth. I suspect there was a juror (or two) who thought he was guilty on all charges but wouldn't vote to convict on the charge carrying a death penalty because they don't believe in the death penalty.

Someone who has principles is to be admired. However, when the principles lead them to prefer letting someone go free because they disagree with the penalty the law requires, they should recuse themselves from a jury that is considering such a verdict.

 

[Lil-Brandi]

I do have an opinion...

I almost believe that celebrity status is wrongfully being mixed in with the process of rightful justice. Time and time again you see cases such as this where the defendent, a prominent figure in the public eye, gets off scott free of most if not all charges against them. On the flip side of this, you see folks everyday that aren't prominent people, getting, for lack of a better word, screwed royally by the justice system. I strongly believe that laws are written for both the criminals and for celebrities. The victim is way down on the list of judicial priorities!!!

 

[Jake2001]

American Jurisprudence

Laws are written by lawyers (politicians), interpreted by lawyers, litigated by lawyers, and practiced [I use the term loosely] by lawyers. The American judicial system is not based upon right and wrong but more by how much money one has to spend on his attorneys. If you want to win a civil case, go out and find the meanest, nastiest, son-of-a-bitch lawyer you can and hire him.

 

[*Eve*]

I think he should have the maximum sentence of that State. I watched some of that trial on Court TV and the man who had killed Shirika Adams testified that Rae had wanted him to beat her up first before killing her. What kind of sorry MF would do that to the mother of his unborn child? I'll tell you who, I man who deserves to rot. It just goes to show when you're rich and have a lot of money and a little fame you can get away with murder, ask OJ.

 

[dancinvixen]

Being that I live in the town where all this brew ha ha is going on, does anyone have an opinion or do you care? I have no opinion really other than if he did it, he should be locked away for life (and not 20 years, the rest of his natural life) with no possibility of parole. Just curious.

No offense as I don't have tv, and don't really watch the news, but who is this person and what happened?

 

[Weird Harold]

No offense as I don't have tv, and don't really watch the news, but who is this person and what happened?

This is the first article I found. http://www.apbonline.com/newscenter/breakingnews/2000/10/13/carruth1013_01.html

It is out of date, because he was found not guilty of first degree murder (death penalty) but guilty of conspiracy, shooting into an occupied vehicle and "intent to harm an unborn child with an instrument".

 

[Chuckus]

Being that I live in the town where all this brew ha ha is going on, does anyone have an opinion or do you care? I have no opinion really other than if he did it, he should be locked away for life (and not 20 years, the rest of his natural life) with no possibility of parole. Just curious.

No offense as I don't have tv, and don't really watch the news, but who is this person and what happened?

Did Weird Harolds post help you?

 

[Laurel]

The verdicts smell of a juror who let their personal beliefs get in the way of finding the truth. I suspect there was a juror (or two) who thought he was guilty on all charges but wouldn't vote to convict on the charge carrying a death penalty because they don't believe in the death penalty.

Someone who has principles is to be admired. However, when the principles lead them to prefer letting someone go free because they disagree with the penalty the law requires, they should recuse themselves from a jury that is considering such a verdict.

If it were possible, I think that a juror in such a situation should recuse him/herself. If it isn't possible, I can't imagine condemning someone to death. The Death Penalty is ineffective as a deterrent, it's inhumane, and it's irreversible. It doesn't undo what the killer did - it only adds one more murder to the score. If there were a 100% effective way to determine guilt or innocence, my opinion might (MAYBE, though I doubt it) change. However, I would rather free a man who may or may not have killed someone than possibly be responsible for taking an innocent life.

If you're truly appalled by murder, then you can't support the death penalty. If you think murder's okay as retribution, then go ahead and support the death penalty. You also have to support gang retribution shootings and Mafia murders. It all comes down to a principle: the idea of an eye for an eye. If you support that principle as a legitimate, then it shouldn't matter who pulls the trigger.

[/rant]

Anyhow, on topic...As much as the OJ verdict pissed me off, I don't see him as a danger to society. He ain't going on a killing spree any time soon. Same with Carruth...no matter what happens from here on out, his name is Mud. His life's fucked. Not as much as Shirika Adams' life, but killing him won't bring her back either.

 

[Guest]

<twitching nose>

He has been here I can smell him..............