Liberalism is a mental illness thread

[jitter77]

I usually respect your opinions, but what are you trying to prove here?

My initial reaction would be that he as well could have found Clancy not guilty….because he knows “what it feels like” to be charged with domestic abuse.
Instead he did the right thing, knowing full well what he did was wrong.

I'm not trying to prove anything. Just not a fan of making a child / domestic abuser a hero. There are many moving parts to this though. If the guy managed to turn his life around and is trying to make a difference, then that is a different story. It's also possible the guy hates women or has a vendetta against them and just wanted to throw Clancy in jail. We may never know the truth, but his past kinda puts a damper on the righteous hero aspect. I am just cautious till I here what he has to say.
Second part is that it is total BS this guy is being doxed. Regardless of his past / decision what is happening to him and his family is dangerous. If roles were reversed and there was a woman liberal holdout and people came after her the libs would be freaking out. Whoever leaked the jurors info and what not should be prosecuted. Now who in there right mind is going to want to serve on a jury honestly in a high profile case. I'm also shocked that 11/12 people seem to think murdering your 3 kids is ok if you are crazy. If the husband had murdered the kids there is 0 chance guys or women are going to be out there supporting him.

 

[ZonaBurgh]

"I'm also shocked that 11/12 people seem to think murdering your 3 kids is ok if you are crazy."

Should have stopped there. The anonymity of jurors should have never, ever been questioned or seen the light of day.
If I had my say, the jurors that decided to go on to all the talk shows should face charges, as well as the inquiring minds need to know media in this country.

 

[Confluence]

"I'm also shocked that 11/12 people seem to think murdering your 3 kids is ok if you are crazy."

Should have stopped there. The anonymity of jurors should have never, ever been questioned or seen the light of day.
If I had my say, the jurors that decided to go on to all the talk shows should face charges, as well as the inquiring minds need to know media in this country.

That should be the first, and only considerations for most people. Not our poster here who wants to lament in great detail about the ONE GOOD MAN who upheld the moral fabric of a nation.

Sad state of affairs.

 

[jitter77]

That should be the first, and only considerations for most people. Not our poster here who wants to lament in great detail about the ONE GOOD MAN who upheld the moral fabric of a nation.

Sad state of affairs.

If the guy was a pedophile and he voted to convict Clancy is he still a good man?

 

[Confluence]

If the guy was a pedophile and he voted to convict Clancy is he still a good man?

in his time on the jury, yes. But it's not about me.

What about the bats hit crazy other 11?

Quite literally why the helll are you focused on the minutiae surrounding the one person who acted normal, while completely ignoring the nasty crazy other 11 that were ready to loose a self-admitted murderer of her own three children?

Does you Daily Beast email compel you keep on and on about this guy? What is wrong with your head?

Can you find another source for your daily outrage porn?

 

[Ron Burgundy]

If the guy was a pedophile and he voted to convict Clancy is he still a good man?

Two separate issues.
Hitler grounded Germany’s zeppelin fleet after the Hindenburg exploded, which was a good idea.

 

[IndySteel]

If the guy was a pedophile and he voted to convict Clancy is he still a good man?

No, he'd be a scumbag but he still made the right decision.

 

[Confluence]

not sure where to put this:

 

[jitter77]

I'm not outraged and I was asked to explain so I did. My only point was i am cautious to make this guy some righteous saint based on his past history. Nothing more nothing less. Yes his verdict was correct in my opinion, but it doesn't erase child and domestic abuse. If he voted based on he felt it was morally correct then great. If he voted because he has a vendetta against women then not so great. As for the other 11 jurors and all the people pledging full support for Lindsey they are crazy and I don't understand it. The jurors identities should no question be protected. If you want to speak out for your self then fine, but there should be 0 clues as to who the other jurors are.

 

[ZonaBurgh]

I'm not outraged and I was asked to explain so I did. My only point was i am cautious to make this guy some righteous saint based on his past history. Nothing more nothing less. Yes his verdict was correct in my opinion, but it doesn't erase child and domestic abuse. If he voted based on he felt it was morally correct then great. If he voted because he has a vendetta against women then not so great. As for the other 11 jurors and all the people pledging full support for Lindsey they are crazy and I don't understand it. The jurors identities should no question be protected. If you want to speak out for your self then fine, but there should be 0 clues as to who the other jurors are.

His past history, which I assume was dealt with through our legal system and resolved, has absolutely nothing to do with him choosing the lifeless bodies of 3 small children over a mentally disturbed adult. Your response has to do with certain media outlets deliberately intruding into his personal life because they didn't agree with the way he voted while serving as a member of this jury.

I can guarantee you, that everyone here, you and me, as well as the remaining 11 jurors have had events in their life that they'd prefer remained private. And not just welching on bets.