Dpp1978
Posts: 1009
Joined: 2/4/2006
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DancingClown
Of course, I can't be sure of anything and have a very limited knowledge of the law. But I would naturally assume that given the overwhelming evidence against him that he would be encouraged to plead guilty? But then I guess there's always 'not guilty on the grounds of diminished responsibility', so yeah, who knows? I guess what I meant was that I couldn't see some Anders Breivik style epic trial coming out of this with "the suspect" attempting to claim some kind of huge ideological or political motive as a defense. But of course, as you imply, who knows?
That's a reasonable position. Far better than the conspiracy version whereby those controlling him will get rid of him before he reaches trial. I was wondering if you'd raise the competence to stand trial issue which will probably be the first hurdle in getting him before a jury.
The question of guilt is probably never going to be tested as the evidence is, as you say, overwhelming.
It is, however, the defence counsel's job to get the best outcome for their client and in this case, should he be competent to stand trial, that would be not guilty by reason of insanity.
It is hard to successfully plead at the best of times: in Colorado it has to be shown that the defendant either wasn't aware that what they were doing was wrong or that they were under some sort of irresistible impulse which compelled them to act. It is strictly applied test and Colorado differs from most jurisdictions in that the burden of proof is on the State to show he was not legally insane: in most places the defence has to show he was.
This is important because the standard of proof required by the State is the criminal standard: beyond reasonable doubt, whereas if the burden were on the defence it would be to the lesser civil standard. What the defence has do is establish that there was reasonable doubt as to his sanity (still a tall order as there is a presumption of sanity which must be rebutted) which is far less onerous a task than showing it was more likely that not that he was insane.
However in cases like this it down to the jury and juries are notoriously fickle; especially in such emotive, high profile cases. It may be that the defence will opt to attempt to take them out of the equation by seeking an agreement with the prosecution to plead guilty in exchange for the death penalty being dropped as a potential punishment. This would be more likely in a state where an execution is more apt to actually take place, but the option is still there. If the prosecution was amenable.
And with evidence this damning there is little reason for them to make such a bargain.
|
Printable Version
RE: Shooting in Denver at Dark Knight Rises - 
they did cover up the WTC attacks pretty well 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread