Brinks bought by ADT

[mnahrgang]

Originally Posted by gromicko

I'm not saying he wasn't found guilty, he was found guilty. He's just not actually guilty.

Isn't that for the jury to decide? .... Oh wait, I guess they did.

[Nick Gromicko]

No jury can (nor is any jury charged with the task to) determine actual guilt.

[mnahrgang]

Originally Posted by gromicko

No jury can (nor is any jury charged with the task to) determine actual guilt.

Huh???? That's exactly what a jury does.

[Nick Gromicko]

No jury can (nor is any jury charged with the task to) determine actual guilt.

What part of that sentence are you having trouble with?

[mnahrgang]

Originally Posted by gromicko

No jury can (nor is any jury charged with the task to) determine actual guilt.

What part of that sentence are you having trouble with?

Then what are they there for, just to waste time?

I appreciate you sticking up for you friend, but he's a conviced FELON.

[Nick Gromicko]

Then what are they there for, just to waste time?

To decide if they think the prosecution has met their burden of proof or not.

No jury or judge is charged with the task of determining actual guilt... or everyone in prison would be actually guilty. And as we know, there are many people who have gone to prison who are not actually guilty of a crime.

[Michael Larson]

Though I admire your loyalty to your friend I see his case also lost on appeal by all 7 judges.

[Nick Gromicko]

Lack of actual guilt is not grounds for appeal.

[mnahrgang]

Originally Posted by gromicko

To decide if they think the prosecution has met their burden of proof or not.

No jury or judge is charged with the task of determining actual guilt... or everyone in prison would be actually guilty. And as we know, there are many people who have gone to prison who are not actually guilty of a crime.

Whatever...

[Nick Gromicko]

About 10,000 innocent people are wrongfully convicted of a crime (found guilty by a jury) each year in the U.S. http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by gromicko

About 10,000 innocent people are wrongfully convicted of a crime (found guilty by a jury) each year in the U.S. http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm

The study also found that the most important factor leading to wrongful conviction is eyewitness
misidentification.

[mnahrgang]

Originally Posted by mlarson

The study also found that the most important factor leading to wrongful conviction is eyewitness
misidentification.

And what percentage does that make up of the total convicted? (ie. those that really did it.)

Nick, I appreciate how you are sticking up for your friend, but virtually no one is going to believe he is innocent. I accept that he MIGHT not be guilty of everything he is accused of, but for crying out loud...22 counts of grand larceny, conspiracy and securities fraud. Come on.

[ldapkus]

Originally Posted by mnahrgang

And what percentage does that make up of the total convicted? (ie. those that really did it.)

Nick, I appreciate how you are sticking up for your friend, but virtually no one is going to believe he is innocent. I accept that he MIGHT not be guilty of everything he is accused of, but for crying out loud...22 counts of grand larceny, conspiracy and securities fraud. Come on.

Sounds like an honest mistake.......22 times

[Nick Gromicko]

I'll tell ya a funny story. Well, it is only funny because it worked out well for me.

I was almost one of those 10,000 in November when I was charged with a small crime: Failing to slow down for a school zone sign. I was arraigned and recently went to trial in Boulder County, CO. I did not hire an attorney and represented myself. My defense was that there was an enormous construction sign placed in front of the school zone sign and that was why I didn't know it was a school zone. I even took a picture of it on the day I was pulled over. In court, the prosecution entered a picture of the street into evidence, weirdly showing no such construction sign was there. The officer then testified that she took the picture that morning and that no such construction sign existed. This struck me as odd because as I drove to the trial that morning, I noticed that the construction sign was still there, 2 months later. How could she have a picture of the street showing no construction sign? I was perplexed, until I noticed something 1/2 cut off at the very bottom of the photo indicating that the officer didn't take the picture but got the image off of google maps. I pointed it out to the judge and accused the officer of lying. The judge finished the hearing but would not rule from the bench. Instead, he said he was going to drive over to the scene of the crime himself and look. Well, I just got a ruling from the court in the mail: Not guilty.

My point(s)? Police/prosecution-manufactured evidence is not that unusual and being found guilty in a court of law is not the same as being actually guilty.

I'm happy I wasn't number 10,001.

[John Onofrey]

I suppose hundreds, if not thousands of inspectors will now have to find a way to replace revenue lost from this deal. I doubt ADT will continue the Brinks/Broadview pay for referral program. That's about an 8k hit for me.

Do I find it hard to sympathize with pigs feeding at the trough who buy 6k shower curtains and ice sculptures of David that piss vodka (as an example)? Um, yes.

Didn't Kozlowski have the option for trial by judge? I would think so. Perhaps he should have spent some of his money on better lawyers.