Religion and Ethics Forum

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on April 03, 2017, 07:14:12 PM

Title: The Anna Stubblefield Case
Post by: Nearly Sane on April 03, 2017, 07:14:12 PM
Very odd case




https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/03/opinion/who-is-the-victim-in-the-anna-stubblefield-case.html?_r=1
Title: Re: The Anna Stubblefield Case
Post by: Rhiannon on April 03, 2017, 07:24:57 PM
Quite horrible.  :(
Title: Re: The Anna Stubblefield Case
Post by: floo on April 04, 2017, 08:19:34 AM
Ghastly.
Title: Re: The Anna Stubblefield Case
Post by: Harrowby Hall on April 04, 2017, 11:37:58 AM
To the best of my knowledge, New Jersey is a Common Law state - that is, its legal system works to the same model as English Law. Its criminal courts operate on the basis that accused people are innocent until proven guilty. It also means that accused people have the right to present a defence to an charge.

In this instance the judge refused to allow the defence the opportunity to present its case. This surely must be declared a mistrial.
Title: Re: The Anna Stubblefield Case
Post by: Rhiannon on April 04, 2017, 11:47:28 AM
To the best of my knowledge, New Jersey is a Common Law state - that is, its legal system works to the same model as English Law. Its criminal courts operate on the basis that accused people are innocent until proven guilty. It also means that accused people have the right to present a defence to an charge.

In this instance the judge refused to allow the defence the opportunity to present its case. This surely must be declared a mistrial.

Why was the evidence ruled inadmissible? It makes no sense.