BREAKING NEWS: David Swain Wins Appeal Against Murder Conviction

[HollywoodiversImaging]

Is this the case that was on 48 hours or 60 minutes a year or two ago?

 

[HollywoodiversImaging]

Is this the case that was on either 48 hours or 60 minutes a year or two ago?

 

[Ayisha]

Criminal conviction requires a much higher burden of proof. And that was not met - not in a fair trial, anyway.

None of us knows if the burden of proof was met. The case was not overturned because the burden of proof was not met. It was overturned because the judge erred in her instructions to the jury - a technicality.

Justice has not been served. It is similar to never having been tried. It is too bad that a re-trial was not granted so that your friend could receive a fair trial.

 

[AfterDark]

None of us knows if the burden of proof was met. The case was not overturned because the burden of proof was not met. It was overturned because the judge erred in her instructions to the jury - a technicality.

Justice has not been served. It is similar to never having been tried. It is too bad that a re-trial was not granted so that your friend could receive a fair trial.

It's too bad he didn't get a fair trial the 1st time.

 

[Thalassamania]

It's too bad he didn't get a fair trial the 1st time.

I could not agree more.

 

[AfterDark]

Originally Posted by AfterDark
It's too bad he didn't get a fair trial the 1st time.

I could not agree more.

Proof that people with opposing opinions can find common ground.

 

[Dadvocate]

Justice has not been served. It is similar to never having been tried. It is too bad that a re-trial was not granted so that your friend could receive a fair trial.

Your penchant for hyperbole never ceases to amaze me. Regardless of whether or not you agree with the decision in this case, Swain having endured two years of real jail time in the BVI can hardly be said to have essentially the same effect as him never having been tried at all.

Quite the contrary…

If he is innocent of this crime, the inanity of this statement becomes all the more clear.

Cheers!

 

[AfterDark]

Yes, presumably the civil trial is an objective indication of his guilt. Or was that also a miscarriage of justice?

.....presumably the civil trial is an objective indication of his guilt. No, it is judged his responsiblity. Someone can be responsible for an accident death resulting but not guility of a crime. There is a difference.

 

[AfterDark]

We are talking about the rules of evidence in the US of A, to wit, the civil trial that was held in Rhode Island.

The law is not a world of science and facts, despite what you may see on TV.

This post fascinates me. The fact that nobody picked up on it is more so. …….”The law is not a world of science and facts”….. The facts part especially. Thal, with your permission I’d like to add that to my signature as one of the most inane things I’ve seen posted on SB. Law not a world or facts? Any attorneys want to enlighten me on this perspective?

 

[vladimir]

.....presumably the civil trial is an objective indication of his guilt. No, it is judged his responsiblity. Someone can be responsible for an accident death resulting but not guility of a crime. There is a difference.

Yes, hypothetically. I was referring to the actual verdict in the civil suit against Swain, not a hypothetical case. It found:

that David Swain had drowned his wife with malicious forethought,

according to the Providence Journal. Perhaps that's not a fair representation of the verdict, but it's all I could find. If you have a link to the actual text of the verdict, I would appreciate it.

I believe the fact that a civil trial jury reached that conclusion (unanimously) is a good indication of his guilt.