Re: The King Brothers Murder Trial Verdict...
Submitted by Joyce Tracy on 2002-09-9 00:27:57, Monday
In reply to The King Brothers Murder Trial Verdict... submitted by Muddyfox72 on 2002-09-7 05:33:31, Saturday
|
You know, if you were at the Rick Chavis trial, watched it or read it, you would see the shoddy way the prosecutor tried the case. He stated that he never belived that Chavis was guilty, therefore could not ask for a guilty verdict. Why then did he try the case? To make an example of the boys? to put them away he hoped for life? Then if you did the same with the King Brothers trial and compared the two trials you would see the prosecutor in action of trying to convict the one(s) he thought was guilty. Isn't this unethical to the highest degree? The boys never got a fair investagtion. The fact that Chavis brainwashed the boys to make the confession to save his own skin, should be known by intellegent adults. That is why he gave them so many details to make it seem real. That is why he told them to keep telling the story to everyone. The fact that they laughed was a result of nervous historics, not because they thought it was funny. And if you are an intellegent adult you would also see how Chavis monipulated, brainwashed, suduced, suxually abused, mentally abused, turned him against his father, told him his father was not really his father, What do you think happened to the child's mind? Then in the boys trial it came out that "he would take care of Terry and no one would know it was him." There were those who lied on the stand, and for what purpose? |
Follow ups: