take another situation
by James Denison - 2/24/13 10:54 AM
In Reply to: What I'm getting at here isn't really about Drew Peterson by itsdigger
Two people, who may be strangers to each other, come upon someone lying side of the road, his life ebbing out from stab wounds. Before the person dies he tells them the name and a description of who stabbed him. He also describes his car the person left in. He then dies. Police come, separate the witnesses to the man's death and both persons give the same information to them. They find the man named later on. They find the car described later on. No knife is ever found. Maybe a blood spot is found on or in the car. No fingerprints on or in the car relate to the person named. A knife known to be owned by the person named as killer which also would match the wounds has disappeared and the person claims he has no idea where it went. Should we believe the dying words as related to witnesses of his death? I would hope so. Is it possible someone else did the stabbing and the dying man made a mistake on who that person was? Possible perhaps, but not probable. Is it possible the knife which would match the wounds and is now missing is NOT the same knife the suspect once owned? Possible, but not probable.
I do agree that passing a new law simply to ease conviction of a current court case is playing dirty pool with the justice system.