Dutch human rights activist, Olax Outis had no “lawful defence” and was stopped from give a closing speech – but was acquitted by the jury in a verdict seen as a snub to a system complicit in Genocide.
That’s part of their job. Anything that’s more prejudicial than probative, anything that isn’t relevant to the charges, anything that has no verifiable source, that all gets tossed if the judge is doing their job. And that’s not an exhaustive list.
Yeah which is a good thing for fairness, and then the fact the jury decided based on more than what was allowed alone was also a representation of a public desire for real justice
That’s part of their job. Anything that’s more prejudicial than probative, anything that isn’t relevant to the charges, anything that has no verifiable source, that all gets tossed if the judge is doing their job. And that’s not an exhaustive list.
Yeah which is a good thing for fairness, and then the fact the jury decided based on more than what was allowed alone was also a representation of a public desire for real justice
I think everyone played their roles
And so the judge decided in this case that the defendants motivations were similarly not relevant.