Quote:
Originally Posted by NCC
(1)You make a valid point, (2)but regardless of what I was being charged with, I would still be interested in seeing justice for my friend. (3)I didn't think it through from the criminal's point of view where saving themselves was more important than seeing justice for their friend. (4)Maybe all of the anger that is directed towards the Stanley's, the prosecutor, and the jury should be directed towards Colten Bouchie's cohorts for bombing the prosecution's case.
|
(1)thank you, (2)depends on your state of mind and intent at the time, (very likely many have not, and (4) I agree
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhunter11
How much was your friends life worth to you? How bad do you want to see someone held accountable? Whether they chose to testify or not, every one of them should have been charged. At least it might have slowed down their crime sprees for a while, if they ended up being convicted.
|
Depends on the 'friend', lifelong or met at the bar while drinking, there are factors that are unavailable to the peanut gallery. And I agree completely, they should have all been charged and have had to testify before/after their own trials, I do not care which. But, again, and this is a WAG, but did the Crown do Stanley a favor in prosecuting the way they did? Huge WAG, but did they know it would be a Gladue response because of the people involved and chose to go this way?
__________________
Only dead fish go with the flow. The rest use their brains in life.
Originally Posted by Twisted Canuck
I wasn't thinking far enough ahead for an outcome, I was ranting. By definition, a rant doesn't imply much forethought.....
