|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Exclusive: ‘Rose Petal Murder’ Juror Details Deliberations, Frustrations Behind Verdict
“I personally do not think it was a fair trial.”
“I personally do not think it was a fair trial.”
|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
6 comments
1. There was no evidence of CSAM found at the scene. First evidence was found on Post’s phone and later at Post’s home and in his locker at cigar bar. But not at home.
2. Sister did not own the home. They were renting.
3. Photos sent to Post’s neighbors, not Parcell’s.
4. There are a lot of rules about what evidence does and doesn’t come in. Whether something is relevant or not, whether the evidence is more privatize than prejudicial, etc. Jurors’ and bloggers’ opinions about that don’t outweigh judge’s legal ruling.
4.
Probative, not privatize. Stupid autocorrect.
Let’s suppose that the convicted killer knew about, and could prove, the sex abuse. What right did he have to take Parcell’s life? Whether he knew or didn’t know, he’s guilty of murder – an unjust taking of life. There is no way, no how, he’s not guilty. The law could justify the “homicide” IF it was to save the child while an act that might have taken the child’s life was taking place but that’s the only exception.
I listened to both Jenn and Nolan equivocate on the pod cast today. To say I was shocked with their “if” answers puts it mildly. This is open and shut, literally, he admitted that he didn’t know the victim, that the child was not there and that he took her life. The state has the right of “vengeance” not the hired hand of the baby daddy.
Are others guilty here? Absolutely, Mello and Post will be going to jail next. However, the State of South Carolina has some guilt here to boot. Supposedly, there were multiple investigations of this debacle and rather than deal with the issue, SC punted, even after both sides showed they were incapable of acting rationally.
As a survivor of CSA, I’m glad that Christina Parcell is no longer a threat to her daughter. The only real victim is the daughter. The State failed her so many times.
Even when she accused her aunt of photographing her in the shower, the police said they had “no probable cause” to search Tina Parcell’s device. WTH. If the police and judicial system had done its job and protected this child then this trial would probably not have happened. I hold them all partially responsible and they need to start doing a better job of protecting our young people. I pray to God that everyone that failed this girl be exposed and removed from their positions before they allow another child to be harmed.
I also feel like the jury failed us all by voting guilty on a case that had so many questions. Did no one wonder why they weren’t told why Bradly Post was in an orange jumpsuit? Or why they were told to disregard testimony about CSA?? I wouldn’t have been able to give a guilty verdict if I felt like I wasn’t given all the facts. I don’t feel like it was a fair trial at all. I don’t think Zach should have done what he did but it was very wrong of Judge Fant and Walt Wilkins to hide evidence and motives. All facts should be presented and then let the jury decide. That did not happen in this case. Isn’t having a fair trial supposed to be a core value in America? How can anyone expect to have a fair trial if the Judge excludes evidence?!
Free Zachery Hughes! He saved a child from 2 evil pedophiles. Why wasn’t the CSAM allowed, that Judge need to retire!
Although I’m glad the child is safe, the only evidence that she was being abused is what hughes was told. There is nothing saying that he saw anything himself. During the trial, Hughes made it out to seem that the child thought of him as a friend, just for it to be revealed that he’d only met her twice. He was also offered $5,000 once to eliminate her & turned it down so next, he was offered $10,000. I wonder if he was paid after he completed the murder. The text messages sure showed that he was relaying the fact that the mission was accomplished. Why?
The CSAM being allowed would have been too prejudicial if it were allowed. Anyone who understands the law and rules of evidence know this.
Think about this: Had the jury been allowed to hear about child’s alleged abuse (there was NO PROOF), & the jury found him not guilty, that would have basically given anyone who SUSPECTED a child of being abused a license to murder the suspected abuser. This would also be taken further into women who are being abused and it being okay to murder THEIR abusers. And animal abusers. And on and on.
The point is, murder is murder… no matter what.