No reaction to the Corasanti verdict??? (Buffalo: felony, attorney, home)

[BigD_JT_14221]

I'm shocked that nobody on here has posted any thoughts on the trial outcome.
My assumption is that most people are stunned by the verdict, but I guess this would be the thread to express your opinions on it.
Personally, I was shocked that he was found not guilty of all but 1 minor charge. I know he had a top-notch legal team, but the evidence seemed overwhelming. I followed the trial exclusively on the Buffalo News website, so maybe their coverage was bias? It just seemed like a slam dunk for convictions on felony manslaughter and felony leaving the scene.
What do you think?

[jblake78728]

The justice system failed miserably. Just goes to show that in our country the life of a 56 year old drunk doctor is more important than a promising young girl with her whole life ahead of her because he has a bigger bank account.

[BigD_JT_14221]

Originally Posted by jblake78728

The justice system failed miserably. Just goes to show that in our country the life of a 56 year old drunk doctor is more important than a promising young girl with her whole life ahead of her because he has a bigger bank account.

JB,
Aside from the attorney he hired, what role do you think the amount of money he has played? The jurors ultimately made the call, and money shouldn't have anything to do with their decision, no?

As a side note. Noodle on this for a moment: What would've happened if Alix was a black teenager and not white? Just think about it for a moment. Jesse Jackson outside the court. Throngs of people with signs demonstrating.
Would there have been mass rioting in Buffalo if the jury came back with this veridct. How would it have changed the trial? Would the jury have convicted for fear of causing riots? Just something to think about...

[jblake78728]

What do you think would of happened if the driver wasn't a doctor or someone else of "means"? Maybe that has more to do with the fact that he could hire a better attorney but its still a failure of the system.

[BigD_JT_14221]

Originally Posted by jblake78728

What do you think would of happened if the driver wasn't a doctor or someone else of "means"? Maybe that has more to do with the fact that he could hire a better attorney but its still a failure of the system.

I can't answer you with 100% certainty. I don't know if the outcome would've been different it was a plumber on trial, or a IT guy, or a store clerk.
What I'm trying to understand is how money influenced the outcome of this 12 person jury trial, as you're seeming to suggest. Aside from being able to hire the best available legal representation, I just don't see any other variable in this trial that money could've influenced. Did the DA allow the denfense to select jurors only from Corasanti's country club?
That's where my beef is. I really have a problem with the jury and how they arrived at not guilty. Forget the money angle, how did the jurors come to this decision based on the evidence presented?

[bmd69]

He didn't know he hit something really, Looked at the BMW hood. Please!

[topchief1]

I know nothing about this trial, but please remember that unless you were part of the jury, you don't know everything that they heard and saw, that might have swayed them a certain way, so it's tough to judge their decision when you don't know everything.

[jblake78728]

Originally Posted by BigD_JT_14221

I can't answer you with 100% certainty. I don't know if the outcome would've been different it was a plumber on trial, or a IT guy, or a store clerk.
What I'm trying to understand is how money influenced the outcome of this 12 person jury trial, as you're seeming to suggest. Aside from being able to hire the best available legal representation, I just don't see any other variable in this trial that money could've influenced. Did the DA allow the denfense to select jurors only from Corasanti's country club?
That's where my beef is. I really have a problem with the jury and how they arrived at not guilty. Forget the money angle, how did the jurors come to this decision based on the evidence presented?

One of the jurors came out today & said Corasanti was believable because he was "well spoken".

[jblake78728]

Originally Posted by topchief1

I know nothing about this trial, but please remember that unless you were part of the jury, you don't know everything that they heard and saw, that might have swayed them a certain way, so it's tough to judge their decision when you don't know everything.

Them old man was drinking ........ he hit a girl & kept on driving (claimed he didn't know he hit anyone/anything) ........ when he got home he noticed the damage to his car & sent his wife out to see what he hit .............. what else needs to be said???

[BigD_JT_14221]

Originally Posted by jblake78728

One of the jurors came out today & said Corasanti was believable because he was "well spoken".

Yeah I read the interview with the jury foreman William Nixon. About Corasanti, he said "He seemed like a very nice man"
It also sounded like the slick expert witnesses brought in by the defense may have tipped it. I guess thats a money aspect I didn't think of initially. Doing the dog & pony show with those expert witnesses is not something the average joe could afford to do.