Ashley Okland Murder
- Thread starter cytheguy
- Start date
Just say you support the concept of Jury Nullification. That will get you kicked off pretty fast
I'm conflicted about this. On one hand I get what you're saying. She probably did do it and it sucks that she has been able to live free for 15 years despite this. On the other hand I think that could be dangerous if police/prosecutors regularly employed that tactic of charging people when they know they don't have enough evidence, a sort of "punishment without being proven guilty" when there should be a presumption of innocence in the Justice system.
But if there's not going to be a conviction (which there certainly could be here) there's also less reason for the police to hold factual information as confidential as well. I think with a lot of cold cases there might be some public interest in releasing some of that info, as I think a large chunk of the time those cases aren't a complete mystery- cops know who probably did it (as they have for 15 years here), they just don't have enough to charge
Some more nuggets of info here.
Most interesting and new is Ramsey returned to the scene and was interview by police at the crime scene. And no gun matching the bullets at the scene were recovered from her house in either of the search warrants.
Most interesting and new is Ramsey returned to the scene and was interview by police at the crime scene. And no gun matching the bullets at the scene were recovered from her house in either of the search warrants.
As someone mentioned earlier, the fanfare of the post-arrest news conference and the new details released yesterday/today, now seem odd.
They have to have something more definitive/new than what's existed since 2011, don't they? Granted we're only getting pieces of what was presented to the Grand Jury, very curious what comes out of this at trial.
They have to have something more definitive/new than what's existed since 2011, don't they? Granted we're only getting pieces of what was presented to the Grand Jury, very curious what comes out of this at trial.
If I’ve ever seen an episode of CSI, I’m ditching that firearm in the river. I sure wouldn’t take it home with me.
Last edited:
She's got a damn good defense team. I used to cover a lot of court for the local media and have seen Parrish in action a lot. He'll have the jury questioning the competency of everyone involved in this investigation. I'm curious how she's able to afford him.
When it's a first degree murder charge I suppose you can dump everything into it even if that means emptying retirement accounts. Not much need for those if you spend the rest of your life in jail
Not saying this is the case, but sometimes they take them for the notoriety (and the $ of course).
I know several in that business and from my opinion she's got the best team in the state.
From the kcci Livestream
"Parrish attacks the state's recent claim that there was a witness, saying that the witness 'was practically blind and didn't identify anyone."
That's certainly an additional wrinkle if true
"Parrish attacks the state's recent claim that there was a witness, saying that the witness 'was practically blind and didn't identify anyone."
That's certainly an additional wrinkle if true
Parrish does a TON of high profile stuff. There's a reason and it's because he's damn good at his job.
And so it begins. Planting doubts in the minds of potential jurors. Alfredo has never taken a guilty client…at least not in his mind.
People think he’s great because he gets high profile cases…..he’s great at slinging mud. If i was wrongly accused of murder he wouldn’t be on my top ten list of attorneys to call. Getting on TV doesn’t equate to being a great lawyer.
Last edited:
Isn't that a requirement for his career? I mean its ****** up his job is to try and get people who are guilty of crimes off from said crimes but that's the name of the game. People, guilty or not guilty, do have rights and due process and while I find his job somewhat reprehensible it is an important part of the justice system.
Could alternately be looked at that his job is to ensure the state actually proves their case. Everyone hates it when it keeps someone who probably did do a crime out of jail, but if you're not protecting the rights of those people then its not a big step for the rights of the truly innocent to be violated.
