Originally Posted by clifp
HTown and Texas, I am curious how the cases you were in ended up...
In HTowns case a robbery gone bad, I'd be on the fence about giving somebody the death penalty.
We found the defendent guilty based on the clarity of the evidence presented to us during the guilt / innocence phase. There was no reasonable doubt on the facts: the accused was indeed the triggerman in an armed robbery-murder.
Entering into the punishment phase, however, there were twelve of us on the fence regarding the sentence. This is as it
must be, Clifp.
Both sides' lawyers proceded to introduce much additional evidence and testimony relevant to the three questions noted in my previous post. This included evidence of additional armed robberies perpetrated by the accused, including several where victims had been shot or shot at.
We deliberated for two very difficult days before answering the three questions to the satisfaction of each and every juror. The man is now on death row.
No hard feelings, folks, but this will be my last post on this thread. My experiences on this one case are unlikely to further a discussion on matching crimes and punishments. (PM me if you have other questions.)