I want to be VERY clear about my thoughts. I'm discussing how I think they got to the verdict and NOT if I agree.

I have worked in the law industry for over 12 years. I have been in court more than most lawyers, but I am NOT a lawyer. I work with all of the evidence and present it in court.

If you are not a regular in court you actually have no idea how it works. because of that there is a perception that all these guys get off when the evidence is so overwhelming.

I say to you change your thinking.

Very simply. We have no idea what evidence is allowed in court or how its presented. We have NO idea if that video was allowed. We have no idea what was KEPT from the jury or allowed. We don't know what was objected to. We don't know how the judge would only allow narrow questioning of a witness or idea.

In my opinion Juries almost always get the right verdict when presented the evidence they are ALLOW to see. Not what we THINK they saw, but the narrow evidence that was allowed to be heard in court.

Keep in mind what we see on the news is RARELY what the ACTUAL facts are. The News is skewed so badly that I don't even believe most of what I see.

But I wanted to let you guys have some inside knowledge of why this keeps happening.

It ALL comes down to what evidence is allowed and how its presented.

Just trying to give people a reason why this keeps happening.