Scary

[unixronin]

According to a book by one of Eric Rudolph's bombing victims, Rudolph was acquitted by juries in three of four mock trials staged by Federal prosecutors while preparing for his trial.  Why?  Insufficient evidence?  Incompetent prosecution?

Nope ... according to author and former clinic nurse Emily Lyons, the jurors apparently felt the victims "got what they deserved" for working at abortion clinics.

U.S. Attorney Alice Martin confirmed Tuesday that at least one mock trial was held but said Lyons "is mistaken in her understanding of the results."

In a statement, Martin said she fully expected Rudolph to be convicted had there been a trial and denied the outcome of a mock proceeding had anything to do with Rudolph's plea.

"The only reason the death penalty was removed was in exchange for pleas in all the Atlanta-area bombings, and disclosure of the location and subsequent rendering safe of over 250 pounds of explosives on public land and rights of way in North Carolina," Martin said.

Personally, I find it scary that in the 21st century, three out of four juries might acquit a home-grown domestic terrorist who bombed Olympic crowds on the basis that murder and terrorism are OK as long as they're done for God.  Seems you can always find someone to pull out the religion card to excuse anything.

Comments

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

Hunh. There's a terrifying use of jury nullification.

-Ogre

[jilara.livejournal.com]

If he'd done it for Allah, instead of God, they wouldn't have waited for a trial. They would have stormed the jail and lynched him. Rudolph has a personal jihad, pure and simple, just without calling it such. Isn't it interesting what a difference minor terminology changes can make...