Whatever event that you look at to get a opinion you have to, in today's world dissect it into it's components
To arrive at the guilty verdict covers many items -- are they all clear and compelling ?
Most matters do not require you to be a scientist, lawyer or a doctor, they just take an ability to observe and logically evaluate
There were many legal items that did not make sense in this farce of a court case and if you look at legal definitions they were simply ridiculous from a common sense perspective
Ultimately any suggestion that this court case represents a real crime is saying that the legal system and hundreds of years of precedence has been thrown out the window
