Syrinx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-30-04 03:11 PM
Original message |
Jayson Williams convicted on cover-up |
|
But acquitted on the underlying crime. How could he cover up a crime that did not occur? Puzzling verdict....
|
Nicholas D Wolfwood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-30-04 03:13 PM
Response to Original message |
|
The action of killing someone is potentially criminal. Therefore, when Williams started tampering and obstructing with evidence, even if he is not guilty of a crime to begin with, he had criminal intent to cover up a felony. Criminal intent+criminal actions=guilty.
|
Syrinx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-30-04 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. ok, I guess that makes sense |
|
Thanks for explaining. :hi:
|
bhunt70
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-30-04 03:16 PM
Response to Original message |
2. not a crime that didn't occur, but one the jury says he didn't commit. |
hippiechick
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-30-04 03:16 PM
Response to Original message |
4. aw, c'mon ... he was confused ... |
|
He's a professional athlete ... give him a break ... he didn't mean to kill anyone, it just sorta happened ... then he got desperate and tried to cover it up ... poor guy ...
:eyes: :puke:
|
Dookus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-30-04 03:17 PM
Response to Original message |
5. it's the same way they convicted Martha Stewart |
|
She committed no crime, but was convicted of lying to investigators about it. Go figure....
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 05:29 PM
Response to Original message |