The actual verdict: Not guilty of murder/manslaughter, but guilty of four counts of lying to police, each of which carry a maximum sentence of one year. Sentencing on Thursday.
Originally Posted by You
So, what do you think? Any comments about the procedings?
The jury may well have gotten this one right. I'm not saying that she was innocent, but the prosecution bears the burden of proof. I'm not aware of any evidence (fingerprints on the duct tape, etc.) that actually proves her involvement in the act. There may have been something that was under my radar, but it appears that twelve jurors came to that conclusion. In the absence of proof, acquittal on the murder/manslaughter charge is the correct verdict.
With regard to her sentence, the news reports on the verdict say she has already been incarcerated awaiting trial since August 2008 -- nearly three (3) years. That's over two thirds of the maximum possible sentence, and this apparently is her first criminal conviction. Thus, I think that her sentence will be: [b]TIME SERVED[b].
>> For a first conviction, it's normally very difficult to justify more than the minimum sentence. The law may additionally allow these sentences to be served concurrently rather than consecutively. The court cannot consider the charges on which the jury acquitted her in the sentencing proceeding.
>> But if the sentence is any less than the time that she has already served, she'll have a claim against the state for the excess. The court won't let that happen. Also, a lesser sentence won't change the fact that she has already been incarcerated for that long.
So I think that she will walk free on Thursday, the sentence of "time served" being completed.