|
Yes, which is good but I wouldn't might having seen it come from jurors as a better side of societal sense.
Though I'm a bit confused about things. The judge ruled yesterday, after Roeder's testimony that he would not give the manslaughter instruction to the jury.
Isn't that a bit of a trap? To make that decision after means that first he got up on that stand and said essentially "I did it, I'm not sorry I did it, and here is why you should go easy on me for doing it." Not that I have any sympathy for him or thing the verdict unjust, but I assume the defense would have been different with the
But I'm sure there's some element I'm not getting in a five paragraph AP wire article.
|