Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
UPDATED:::CATA Group- New thread!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mattsmom277" data-source="post: 443584" data-attributes="member: 4264"><p>In response to this: if Casey makes money from selling her story, the State will also have a claim on it for reimbursement of what the State paid out for her legal representation</p><p></p><p>Playing devils advocate, can he really believe this is viable and will happen? I mean honestly, again playing devils advocate, let's say I face trial in Florida on a murder charge facing the death penalty. I have no funds for a defense so the state provides the funds for such. I then am found not guilty, lets say because I truly was innocent and the real killer is found, or there was found to be no actual proof of murder happening at all (no body or something silly like that). So I write a book or do a paid interview or whatever, somehow I get income from sharing my story of false imprisonment and my role as a falsely accused person facing a possible death penalty conviction. Somehow that money would be taken to pay the state for the defense that shouldn't have happened because I was found innocent? Of course not. That's like saying the people proved innocent via things like THe Innocent Project should have to pay back for their defense fess on their wrongful convictions. </p><p></p><p>I don't like to think of ANYONE profiting off this situation. I however highly doubt we will ever see Casey nor anyone at all having to repay their defense funds simply because a jury found them not guilty. Law dictates defendents have a constitutional right to legal defense provided by the state when facing a jury trial, if they can't afford one themselves. Never ever ever does one then have to pay back for the access to the defense team that results in them being not guilty. I don't know why on earth that man was saying such nonsense to the media as its beyond absurd and irrational. Seems to only serve to fuel the anger at the idea that Casey could perhaps receive payment for selling her story in some manner, further fanning the fury of the public who will never believe this jury did their job correctly. But it certainly is NOT a statement based on fact. Why oh why do people make such dumb statements? I mean as a prosecutor for the state he KNOWS this is BS and will never happen. He hates the verdict. Understandable. But this is a bit inflammatory for simply sake of inflaming a situation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mattsmom277, post: 443584, member: 4264"] In response to this: if Casey makes money from selling her story, the State will also have a claim on it for reimbursement of what the State paid out for her legal representation Playing devils advocate, can he really believe this is viable and will happen? I mean honestly, again playing devils advocate, let's say I face trial in Florida on a murder charge facing the death penalty. I have no funds for a defense so the state provides the funds for such. I then am found not guilty, lets say because I truly was innocent and the real killer is found, or there was found to be no actual proof of murder happening at all (no body or something silly like that). So I write a book or do a paid interview or whatever, somehow I get income from sharing my story of false imprisonment and my role as a falsely accused person facing a possible death penalty conviction. Somehow that money would be taken to pay the state for the defense that shouldn't have happened because I was found innocent? Of course not. That's like saying the people proved innocent via things like THe Innocent Project should have to pay back for their defense fess on their wrongful convictions. I don't like to think of ANYONE profiting off this situation. I however highly doubt we will ever see Casey nor anyone at all having to repay their defense funds simply because a jury found them not guilty. Law dictates defendents have a constitutional right to legal defense provided by the state when facing a jury trial, if they can't afford one themselves. Never ever ever does one then have to pay back for the access to the defense team that results in them being not guilty. I don't know why on earth that man was saying such nonsense to the media as its beyond absurd and irrational. Seems to only serve to fuel the anger at the idea that Casey could perhaps receive payment for selling her story in some manner, further fanning the fury of the public who will never believe this jury did their job correctly. But it certainly is NOT a statement based on fact. Why oh why do people make such dumb statements? I mean as a prosecutor for the state he KNOWS this is BS and will never happen. He hates the verdict. Understandable. But this is a bit inflammatory for simply sake of inflaming a situation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
UPDATED:::CATA Group- New thread!
Top