Posted by PeachCapitalusa (anonymous) on October 8, 2009 at 10:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Not sure how i feel about continuing to try a man until you get the verdict that you want.. he may be guilty but if you could not convince a jury the first two times then what gives you the right to try him again and again until you get the verdict you want.. i have always had a problem with this law.. i hope and pray to god he is really guilty..

Posted by mrjones0913 (anonymous) on October 8, 2009 at 10:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I do not know about you, but I for one am glad to see Chilton County work so hard to put a TRUE criminal behind bars. He still needs counseling though he may never get out. The reason he needs counseling is for him to get straight with a power higher than him and for the family's sake. I will pray for all involved.

Posted by chiltoncopeach (anonymous) on October 9, 2009 at 5:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

PeachCapitalusa: Well it is easy to have two mistrials when you have a judge presiding over the case who is speaking to jurors, witnesses, attorney's, and law enforcement when they shouldn't be...I know that if this had been your brother you would not feel as if justice had been served either.

mrjoneso913: The AG's office had a little to do with this one because of issues with Chilton County's "trier of fact and law" who presided over the case. It is bad for our county when Montgomery has to get involved in order to seek justice for a murder. God bless the families involved on each side of this case including the judge who presided over the case. May God be with you SGR and the families involved as you continue to preside over cases in ANY county.

Posted by juswannabeheard (anonymous) on October 9, 2009 at 7:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Even justice can't get past the "Good Ole Boys Club".

Posted by southernpride (anonymous) on October 9, 2009 at 11:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I understand that the vote last time was 11 to 1 for not guilty. No new evidence was presented. I can not speak for the jury but wonder how they came to the conclusion of guilty when two other juries did not.

I really don't understand our district attorney picking up a shell casing at the crime scene and throwing it into a pond. It may of proved the defendant's guilt or may of exonerated him. Does the chief law enforcement of Autauga, Elmore and Chilton counties doing this not concern anyone?

I think if you try someone enough times even if you can't place them at the scene of the crime, you will get a guilty verdict sooner or later.

So chiltoncopeach, are you saying it was the judge's fault he was not convicted the first two times he was tried? Why no comment on what the chidf law enforcement did? More detail please.

Posted by southernpride (anonymous) on October 9, 2009 at 11:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

As far as I know there is no limit even though that does not make sense to me. I have not done any research however.

Posted by chiltoncopeach (anonymous) on October 9, 2009 at 4:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

southernpride: what are you referring to? The father being arrested for child molestation. I can comment on that: see the article...

Posted by urentitled2myopinion (anonymous) on October 9, 2009 at 6:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Someone can be tried multiple times for the same crime. You must get a verdict in order to not be tried again. If the first jury had convicted or found him innocent there would not have been another trial. It may not sound right, but until they got a verdict this could continue for as long as the state wanted to spend the money. By the way it was your tax dollars that paid for the state lawyers and the defendant's lawyers. The bill on this entire event is more than we probably want to know. It was also said if they did not get a verdict this time they would do it all over again.

Posted by travlr423 (anonymous) on October 9, 2009 at 9:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

maybe They should have put the juice to him.

Posted by travlr423 (anonymous) on October 10, 2009 at 5:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

rickey, maybe the reason you have not been able to grasp that concept is because that it is not designed to teach that killing is wrong but more to rid society of those who do not have any regards to human life. The same reason if you cut off the hands of thief you eliminate his ability to be a farther threat to society and the assets of honest and hard working people. But we can always lock him up for 20 or 30 yrs. at the taxpayers expense just to return him back into society to do it to someone else. and the next time it may very well be one of your relatives or possibly me or you. if these guys had any regards to human life other than their own they would not have committed this murder or been on trial in the beginning. A man is justified in murder when it is to protect his own life or the life of another innocent person. And i can hardly have pity on a man who would kill for traveling money, that in its self proves a man has no regards or conscience for the value of human life.

Posted by travlr423 (anonymous) on October 10, 2009 at 9:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rickey,
What i would like to know is what is the two million dollar savings per case used for that benefits the innocent people. I would rather spend five million to put that kind of killer to death than one million to incarcerate him only to turn him back out to take another innocent life. How much is one innocent life worth? Just my personal opinion and pretty much my observation of returning pedophiles and stone cold killers back into the free world.

Posted by gonefishin (anonymous) on October 11, 2009 at 4:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Has anyone mentioned this is not the first murder he has been involved in?
It was allowed in the trial either.

Posted by gonefishin (anonymous) on October 11, 2009 at 4:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm sorry....type-o

It was NOT allowed in the trial.

Posted by southernpride (anonymous) on October 13, 2009 at 12:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Peach you should read the article and comments. It is about trying the guy that was convicted for murder more than once.

What are you talking about???????????

Posted by southernpride (anonymous) on October 13, 2009 at 1:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Is it justice to keep trying a case until you get a conviction?

kw even if it was a family member, with 11 not guilty votes at the second trial, I would be wondering if they had the right guy or at least what was wrong with the state that they had to keep trying