Hannah Graham - what's the latest?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Exactly. And someone will be defending him, KNOWING he stalked, raped and murdered those girls.

And what is your point? He needs an attorney, so someone has to do it. As pointed out, our justice system relies on having an advocate for both sides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Exactly. And someone will be defending him, KNOWING he stalked, raped and murdered those girls.

And what is your point? He needs an attorney, so someone has to do it. As pointed out, our justice system relies on having an advocate for both sides.

I think my point is fairly clear. Only a despicable human being is capable of defending a monster like this. You disagree. I get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am so very sad for this family. I also do not understand why her friends left her alone. We partied quite a bit in college, but never left each other alone in strange places. No matter what.

Yup, same thing with Natalie Holloway, right? I use to party hard, and I knew it (plus I was Hot, flirtatious, and dressed very provocatively). I would always tell my friends before we left for the party to please not let me leave with some guy, no matter what I said or how much I protested. If they had to, they were to pick me up and drag me to the car, but they were NOT to let me go with a stranger. They always made sure I made it home the same way I arrived...with them!

I now tell my teen DD that she is never to let her friends leave with some guy and she herself is never to leave with a guy she just met, just because he's nice or whatever. Tragedy can happen in an instant!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the bottom of this article in the comments section on poster claims that she knew Jesse Matthew and his father was alcoholic who beat him. Who knows but I imagine he was probably abused in some way to turn into such a monster. Dad should join his son in jail.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/neighbors-of-jesse-matthews-mother-speak-out-about-multiple-investigations/29263116?item=1

It's probably violence passed down through the generations. It's what they know and experience.

Be careful that you are not slandering the dad by repeating unproven gossip.

The son will do plenty of shaming just by being himself. No need to worry about slandering dear ol dad.

If this is true, the tragedy is exponential. So very sad. I'm sure will be used by defense attorney, again, if true.

So if his dad was an alcoholic and beat him, it excuses him raping and murdering people?

Whoever defends this guy is slime. Is his original attorney still with him, anyone know?

Shut your ignorant mouth. The right to representation belongs to everyone, not just innocent people. That is one of the bedrock principles of this country and what sets the US apart from a lot of other places. It's easy to represent those to have virtue; it's much harder to do what his attorney will have to do. And while I could not be a criminal defense attorney, I'm glad there people who are. Because, everyone gets the chance to put the state to prove their case. And that is absolutely as it should be. You want to be a proud American? You should be proud of this part of it.

+1

+2

+3

+ another one. This is one of the touchstones of our country's principles, and how the justice system functions. In no way does having an attorney diminish a criminal's penalty. If you want him to NOT have an attorney, or if you think all attorneys who are good people should decline to represent guilty people, you should consider moving to a place where they still stone people to death.

If he is prove guilty via forensics then yes, I think an attorney who attempts to get him a lesser sentence in exchange for money and publicity I'd despicable. I'm not saying he doesn't have the RIGHT to an attorney.

NP here. Are you really this clueless? Do you not understand how the criminal justice system works? And that it works that way to protect people from being wrongly convicted. You don't just get a hit on DNA and have the right to lock someone up. There are all sorts of things wrong with that 1) how do you make sure that the DNA is not contaminated? 2) how do you make sure that there isn't an innocent explanation? That's what a trial is for and he absolutely has the right to a trial and until that occurs he is innocent until proven guilty as much as you have already sentenced him. I for one am very happy to have this kind of legal system here and you should be too in case you ever get arrested for a crime -- whether you did or did not do it. It's not just about getting him a lesser sentence it's about making sure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice.

Fairfax rape and Morgan Harrington's killer were linked by DNA before Hannah went missing, before JM was even a suspect. Obviously, JM has a right to representation and a right to a fair trial...but....

Before the court of public opinion sentences him, a jury needs to see those results and needs to hear where they were taken and how they were handled, what type of DNA it was and where it was found. He also needs to have the opportunity to provide an explanation - could it be that they were both in his cab, for example. However, far fetched it seems you would want to same rights if you were ever charged of a crime. We need to afford him this, without it our entire legal system is in jeopardy, not just for scum bag murderers but all types of criminal justice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the bottom of this article in the comments section on poster claims that she knew Jesse Matthew and his father was alcoholic who beat him. Who knows but I imagine he was probably abused in some way to turn into such a monster. Dad should join his son in jail.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/neighbors-of-jesse-matthews-mother-speak-out-about-multiple-investigations/29263116?item=1

It's probably violence passed down through the generations. It's what they know and experience.

Be careful that you are not slandering the dad by repeating unproven gossip.

The son will do plenty of shaming just by being himself. No need to worry about slandering dear ol dad.

If this is true, the tragedy is exponential. So very sad. I'm sure will be used by defense attorney, again, if true.

So if his dad was an alcoholic and beat him, it excuses him raping and murdering people?

Whoever defends this guy is slime. Is his original attorney still with him, anyone know?

Shut your ignorant mouth. The right to representation belongs to everyone, not just innocent people. That is one of the bedrock principles of this country and what sets the US apart from a lot of other places. It's easy to represent those to have virtue; it's much harder to do what his attorney will have to do. And while I could not be a criminal defense attorney, I'm glad there people who are. Because, everyone gets the chance to put the state to prove their case. And that is absolutely as it should be. You want to be a proud American? You should be proud of this part of it.

+1

+2

+3

+ another one. This is one of the touchstones of our country's principles, and how the justice system functions. In no way does having an attorney diminish a criminal's penalty. If you want him to NOT have an attorney, or if you think all attorneys who are good people should decline to represent guilty people, you should consider moving to a place where they still stone people to death.

If he is prove guilty via forensics then yes, I think an attorney who attempts to get him a lesser sentence in exchange for money and publicity I'd despicable. I'm not saying he doesn't have the RIGHT to an attorney.

NP here. Are you really this clueless? Do you not understand how the criminal justice system works? And that it works that way to protect people from being wrongly convicted. You don't just get a hit on DNA and have the right to lock someone up. There are all sorts of things wrong with that 1) how do you make sure that the DNA is not contaminated? 2) how do you make sure that there isn't an innocent explanation? That's what a trial is for and he absolutely has the right to a trial and until that occurs he is innocent until proven guilty as much as you have already sentenced him. I for one am very happy to have this kind of legal system here and you should be too in case you ever get arrested for a crime -- whether you did or did not do it. It's not just about getting him a lesser sentence it's about making sure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice.

Fairfax rape and Morgan Harrington's killer were linked by DNA before Hannah went missing, before JM was even a suspect. Obviously, JM has a right to representation and a right to a fair trial...but....

Exactly. And someone will be defending him, KNOWING he stalked, raped and murdered those girls.

You don't KNOW much of this yet. That's why there needs to be a trial. But I guess you just think that anyone accused of murder should be thrown to the lions? What about rape? Sexual assault? Now what about burglary? What about embezzlement? What about a bar fight? A guy who's being mugged who fights back then gets accused of assault himself? What about the person who looks like the suspect in a crime and is identified by a witness, but who wasn't actually there? What about the guy whose DNA is all over the crime scene because he was dating the victim, but he was hundreds of miles away when she died? What about the guy whose "friend" said was at the crime scene, because he wanted to get back at him?

We need a trial. And he needs a competent lawyer to defend him. It's the bedrock of our democracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the bottom of this article in the comments section on poster claims that she knew Jesse Matthew and his father was alcoholic who beat him. Who knows but I imagine he was probably abused in some way to turn into such a monster. Dad should join his son in jail.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/neighbors-of-jesse-matthews-mother-speak-out-about-multiple-investigations/29263116?item=1

It's probably violence passed down through the generations. It's what they know and experience.

Be careful that you are not slandering the dad by repeating unproven gossip.

The son will do plenty of shaming just by being himself. No need to worry about slandering dear ol dad.

If this is true, the tragedy is exponential. So very sad. I'm sure will be used by defense attorney, again, if true.

So if his dad was an alcoholic and beat him, it excuses him raping and murdering people?

Whoever defends this guy is slime. Is his original attorney still with him, anyone know?

Shut your ignorant mouth. The right to representation belongs to everyone, not just innocent people. That is one of the bedrock principles of this country and what sets the US apart from a lot of other places. It's easy to represent those to have virtue; it's much harder to do what his attorney will have to do. And while I could not be a criminal defense attorney, I'm glad there people who are. Because, everyone gets the chance to put the state to prove their case. And that is absolutely as it should be. You want to be a proud American? You should be proud of this part of it.

+1

+2

+3

+ another one. This is one of the touchstones of our country's principles, and how the justice system functions. In no way does having an attorney diminish a criminal's penalty. If you want him to NOT have an attorney, or if you think all attorneys who are good people should decline to represent guilty people, you should consider moving to a place where they still stone people to death.

If he is prove guilty via forensics then yes, I think an attorney who attempts to get him a lesser sentence in exchange for money and publicity I'd despicable. I'm not saying he doesn't have the RIGHT to an attorney.

NP here. Are you really this clueless? Do you not understand how the criminal justice system works? And that it works that way to protect people from being wrongly convicted. You don't just get a hit on DNA and have the right to lock someone up. There are all sorts of things wrong with that 1) how do you make sure that the DNA is not contaminated? 2) how do you make sure that there isn't an innocent explanation? That's what a trial is for and he absolutely has the right to a trial and until that occurs he is innocent until proven guilty as much as you have already sentenced him. I for one am very happy to have this kind of legal system here and you should be too in case you ever get arrested for a crime -- whether you did or did not do it. It's not just about getting him a lesser sentence it's about making sure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice.

Fairfax rape and Morgan Harrington's killer were linked by DNA before Hannah went missing, before JM was even a suspect. Obviously, JM has a right to representation and a right to a fair trial...but....

Before the court of public opinion sentences him, a jury needs to see those results and needs to hear where they were taken and how they were handled, what type of DNA it was and where it was found. He also needs to have the opportunity to provide an explanation - could it be that they were both in his cab, for example. However, far fetched it seems you would want to same rights if you were ever charged of a crime. We need to afford him this, without it our entire legal system is in jeopardy, not just for scum bag murderers but all types of criminal justice.

Well, like I said, he does deserve a trial. Maybe the girls he gives rides to just run into terrible luck after he drops them off...at fields, behind deserted houses. Just a weird coincidence.

[Anonymous]

What he needs is an excellent lawyer whose work cannot be challenged/ changed after he is convicted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the bottom of this article in the comments section on poster claims that she knew Jesse Matthew and his father was alcoholic who beat him. Who knows but I imagine he was probably abused in some way to turn into such a monster. Dad should join his son in jail.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/neighbors-of-jesse-matthews-mother-speak-out-about-multiple-investigations/29263116?item=1

It's probably violence passed down through the generations. It's what they know and experience.

Be careful that you are not slandering the dad by repeating unproven gossip.

The son will do plenty of shaming just by being himself. No need to worry about slandering dear ol dad.

If this is true, the tragedy is exponential. So very sad. I'm sure will be used by defense attorney, again, if true.

So if his dad was an alcoholic and beat him, it excuses him raping and murdering people?

Whoever defends this guy is slime. Is his original attorney still with him, anyone know?

Shut your ignorant mouth. The right to representation belongs to everyone, not just innocent people. That is one of the bedrock principles of this country and what sets the US apart from a lot of other places. It's easy to represent those to have virtue; it's much harder to do what his attorney will have to do. And while I could not be a criminal defense attorney, I'm glad there people who are. Because, everyone gets the chance to put the state to prove their case. And that is absolutely as it should be. You want to be a proud American? You should be proud of this part of it.

+1

+2

+3

+ another one. This is one of the touchstones of our country's principles, and how the justice system functions. In no way does having an attorney diminish a criminal's penalty. If you want him to NOT have an attorney, or if you think all attorneys who are good people should decline to represent guilty people, you should consider moving to a place where they still stone people to death.

If he is prove guilty via forensics then yes, I think an attorney who attempts to get him a lesser sentence in exchange for money and publicity I'd despicable. I'm not saying he doesn't have the RIGHT to an attorney.

NP here. Are you really this clueless? Do you not understand how the criminal justice system works? And that it works that way to protect people from being wrongly convicted. You don't just get a hit on DNA and have the right to lock someone up. There are all sorts of things wrong with that 1) how do you make sure that the DNA is not contaminated? 2) how do you make sure that there isn't an innocent explanation? That's what a trial is for and he absolutely has the right to a trial and until that occurs he is innocent until proven guilty as much as you have already sentenced him. I for one am very happy to have this kind of legal system here and you should be too in case you ever get arrested for a crime -- whether you did or did not do it. It's not just about getting him a lesser sentence it's about making sure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice.

Fairfax rape and Morgan Harrington's killer were linked by DNA before Hannah went missing, before JM was even a suspect. Obviously, JM has a right to representation and a right to a fair trial...but....

Exactly. And someone will be defending him, KNOWING he stalked, raped and murdered those girls.

You don't KNOW much of this yet. That's why there needs to be a trial. But I guess you just think that anyone accused of murder should be thrown to the lions? What about rape? Sexual assault? Now what about burglary? What about embezzlement? What about a bar fight? A guy who's being mugged who fights back then gets accused of assault himself? What about the person who looks like the suspect in a crime and is identified by a witness, but who wasn't actually there? What about the guy whose DNA is all over the crime scene because he was dating the victim, but he was hundreds of miles away when she died? What about the guy whose "friend" said was at the crime scene, because he wanted to get back at him?

We need a trial. And he needs a competent lawyer to defend him. It's the bedrock of our democracy.

Are you intentionally being obtuse or do you not know anything about this particular case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the bottom of this article in the comments section on poster claims that she knew Jesse Matthew and his father was alcoholic who beat him. Who knows but I imagine he was probably abused in some way to turn into such a monster. Dad should join his son in jail.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/neighbors-of-jesse-matthews-mother-speak-out-about-multiple-investigations/29263116?item=1

It's probably violence passed down through the generations. It's what they know and experience.

Be careful that you are not slandering the dad by repeating unproven gossip.

The son will do plenty of shaming just by being himself. No need to worry about slandering dear ol dad.

If this is true, the tragedy is exponential. So very sad. I'm sure will be used by defense attorney, again, if true.

So if his dad was an alcoholic and beat him, it excuses him raping and murdering people?

Whoever defends this guy is slime. Is his original attorney still with him, anyone know?

Shut your ignorant mouth. The right to representation belongs to everyone, not just innocent people. That is one of the bedrock principles of this country and what sets the US apart from a lot of other places. It's easy to represent those to have virtue; it's much harder to do what his attorney will have to do. And while I could not be a criminal defense attorney, I'm glad there people who are. Because, everyone gets the chance to put the state to prove their case. And that is absolutely as it should be. You want to be a proud American? You should be proud of this part of it.

+1

+2

+3

+ another one. This is one of the touchstones of our country's principles, and how the justice system functions. In no way does having an attorney diminish a criminal's penalty. If you want him to NOT have an attorney, or if you think all attorneys who are good people should decline to represent guilty people, you should consider moving to a place where they still stone people to death.

If he is prove guilty via forensics then yes, I think an attorney who attempts to get him a lesser sentence in exchange for money and publicity I'd despicable. I'm not saying he doesn't have the RIGHT to an attorney.

NP here. Are you really this clueless? Do you not understand how the criminal justice system works? And that it works that way to protect people from being wrongly convicted. You don't just get a hit on DNA and have the right to lock someone up. There are all sorts of things wrong with that 1) how do you make sure that the DNA is not contaminated? 2) how do you make sure that there isn't an innocent explanation? That's what a trial is for and he absolutely has the right to a trial and until that occurs he is innocent until proven guilty as much as you have already sentenced him. I for one am very happy to have this kind of legal system here and you should be too in case you ever get arrested for a crime -- whether you did or did not do it. It's not just about getting him a lesser sentence it's about making sure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice.

Fairfax rape and Morgan Harrington's killer were linked by DNA before Hannah went missing, before JM was even a suspect. Obviously, JM has a right to representation and a right to a fair trial...but....

Exactly. And someone will be defending him, KNOWING he stalked, raped and murdered those girls.

You don't KNOW much of this yet. That's why there needs to be a trial. But I guess you just think that anyone accused of murder should be thrown to the lions? What about rape? Sexual assault? Now what about burglary? What about embezzlement? What about a bar fight? A guy who's being mugged who fights back then gets accused of assault himself? What about the person who looks like the suspect in a crime and is identified by a witness, but who wasn't actually there? What about the guy whose DNA is all over the crime scene because he was dating the victim, but he was hundreds of miles away when she died? What about the guy whose "friend" said was at the crime scene, because he wanted to get back at him?

We need a trial. And he needs a competent lawyer to defend him. It's the bedrock of our democracy.

Are you intentionally being obtuse or do you not know anything about this particular case?

I'm not the PP, but you are the one who seems obtuse. You seem to think that some criminals don't deserve representation because of the heinousness of their crimes. And that's not the way that the judicial process works, nor is it supposed to. There's a reason that Lady Justice is shown as being blindfolded.

You seem concerned that a black man is going to get off lightly for raping and killing white women in Virginia. I don't think you have anything to fear on that front.

[Anonymous]

You seem concerned that a black man is going to get off lightly for raping and killing white women in Virginia. I don't think you have anything to fear on that front.

I don’t see anything in the pp.’s post that warrants such a statement from you. S/he has opinions and is stating them. For the record, I do not agree with all the views of the pp, but there is nothing there about race. Seems as if this statement stems from your own insecurities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the bottom of this article in the comments section on poster claims that she knew Jesse Matthew and his father was alcoholic who beat him. Who knows but I imagine he was probably abused in some way to turn into such a monster. Dad should join his son in jail.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/neighbors-of-jesse-matthews-mother-speak-out-about-multiple-investigations/29263116?item=1

It's probably violence passed down through the generations. It's what they know and experience.

Be careful that you are not slandering the dad by repeating unproven gossip.

The son will do plenty of shaming just by being himself. No need to worry about slandering dear ol dad.

If this is true, the tragedy is exponential. So very sad. I'm sure will be used by defense attorney, again, if true.

So if his dad was an alcoholic and beat him, it excuses him raping and murdering people?

Whoever defends this guy is slime. Is his original attorney still with him, anyone know?

Shut your ignorant mouth. The right to representation belongs to everyone, not just innocent people. That is one of the bedrock principles of this country and what sets the US apart from a lot of other places. It's easy to represent those to have virtue; it's much harder to do what his attorney will have to do. And while I could not be a criminal defense attorney, I'm glad there people who are. Because, everyone gets the chance to put the state to prove their case. And that is absolutely as it should be. You want to be a proud American? You should be proud of this part of it.

+1

+2

+3

+ another one. This is one of the touchstones of our country's principles, and how the justice system functions. In no way does having an attorney diminish a criminal's penalty. If you want him to NOT have an attorney, or if you think all attorneys who are good people should decline to represent guilty people, you should consider moving to a place where they still stone people to death.

If he is prove guilty via forensics then yes, I think an attorney who attempts to get him a lesser sentence in exchange for money and publicity I'd despicable. I'm not saying he doesn't have the RIGHT to an attorney.

NP here. Are you really this clueless? Do you not understand how the criminal justice system works? And that it works that way to protect people from being wrongly convicted. You don't just get a hit on DNA and have the right to lock someone up. There are all sorts of things wrong with that 1) how do you make sure that the DNA is not contaminated? 2) how do you make sure that there isn't an innocent explanation? That's what a trial is for and he absolutely has the right to a trial and until that occurs he is innocent until proven guilty as much as you have already sentenced him. I for one am very happy to have this kind of legal system here and you should be too in case you ever get arrested for a crime -- whether you did or did not do it. It's not just about getting him a lesser sentence it's about making sure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice.

Fairfax rape and Morgan Harrington's killer were linked by DNA before Hannah went missing, before JM was even a suspect. Obviously, JM has a right to representation and a right to a fair trial...but....

Exactly. And someone will be defending him, KNOWING he stalked, raped and murdered those girls.

You don't KNOW much of this yet. That's why there needs to be a trial. But I guess you just think that anyone accused of murder should be thrown to the lions? What about rape? Sexual assault? Now what about burglary? What about embezzlement? What about a bar fight? A guy who's being mugged who fights back then gets accused of assault himself? What about the person who looks like the suspect in a crime and is identified by a witness, but who wasn't actually there? What about the guy whose DNA is all over the crime scene because he was dating the victim, but he was hundreds of miles away when she died? What about the guy whose "friend" said was at the crime scene, because he wanted to get back at him?

We need a trial. And he needs a competent lawyer to defend him. It's the bedrock of our democracy.

Are you intentionally being obtuse or do you not know anything about this particular case?

I'm not the PP, but you are the one who seems obtuse. You seem to think that some criminals don't deserve representation because of the heinousness of their crimes. And that's not the way that the judicial process works, nor is it supposed to. There's a reason that Lady Justice is shown as being blindfolded.

You seem concerned that a black man is going to get off lightly for raping and killing white women in Virginia. I don't think you have anything to fear on that front.

WTF are you talking about?
Race is totally irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about him not deserving representation based on the way our justice system is set up.
I said, ONCE AGAIN, that if evidence comes to light, as it's looking like it will, that proves his monstrous acts, that a person who defends him must be lacking in morality. Not sure how to make it any clearer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What he needs is an excellent lawyer whose work cannot be challenged/ changed after he is convicted.

This. PP who believes that the defense attorney is scum or whatever, please think about it this way. You want Jesse Matthew to have the best representation possible, even in the face of his obvious guilt. What you do not want is some two-bit hack who is only interested in publicity, because that sort of thing opens the door to mistrials, appeals and possibly him going free. The justice system exists to provide strong prosecutions, strong defenses and strong convictions. When the first two are weak, so is the 3rd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What he needs is an excellent lawyer whose work cannot be challenged/ changed after he is convicted.

This. PP who believes that the defense attorney is scum or whatever, please think about it this way. You want Jesse Matthew to have the best representation possible, even in the face of his obvious guilt. What you do not want is some two-bit hack who is only interested in publicity, because that sort of thing opens the door to mistrials, appeals and possibly him going free. The justice system exists to provide strong prosecutions, strong defenses and strong convictions. When the first two are weak, so is the 3rd.

I think O.J. will permeate society for a long, long time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the bottom of this article in the comments section on poster claims that she knew Jesse Matthew and his father was alcoholic who beat him. Who knows but I imagine he was probably abused in some way to turn into such a monster. Dad should join his son in jail.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/neighbors-of-jesse-matthews-mother-speak-out-about-multiple-investigations/29263116?item=1

It's probably violence passed down through the generations. It's what they know and experience.

Be careful that you are not slandering the dad by repeating unproven gossip.

The son will do plenty of shaming just by being himself. No need to worry about slandering dear ol dad.

If this is true, the tragedy is exponential. So very sad. I'm sure will be used by defense attorney, again, if true.

So if his dad was an alcoholic and beat him, it excuses him raping and murdering people?

Whoever defends this guy is slime. Is his original attorney still with him, anyone know?

Shut your ignorant mouth. The right to representation belongs to everyone, not just innocent people. That is one of the bedrock principles of this country and what sets the US apart from a lot of other places. It's easy to represent those to have virtue; it's much harder to do what his attorney will have to do. And while I could not be a criminal defense attorney, I'm glad there people who are. Because, everyone gets the chance to put the state to prove their case. And that is absolutely as it should be. You want to be a proud American? You should be proud of this part of it.

+1

+2

+3

+ another one. This is one of the touchstones of our country's principles, and how the justice system functions. In no way does having an attorney diminish a criminal's penalty. If you want him to NOT have an attorney, or if you think all attorneys who are good people should decline to represent guilty people, you should consider moving to a place where they still stone people to death.

If he is prove guilty via forensics then yes, I think an attorney who attempts to get him a lesser sentence in exchange for money and publicity I'd despicable. I'm not saying he doesn't have the RIGHT to an attorney.

NP here. Are you really this clueless? Do you not understand how the criminal justice system works? And that it works that way to protect people from being wrongly convicted. You don't just get a hit on DNA and have the right to lock someone up. There are all sorts of things wrong with that 1) how do you make sure that the DNA is not contaminated? 2) how do you make sure that there isn't an innocent explanation? That's what a trial is for and he absolutely has the right to a trial and until that occurs he is innocent until proven guilty as much as you have already sentenced him. I for one am very happy to have this kind of legal system here and you should be too in case you ever get arrested for a crime -- whether you did or did not do it. It's not just about getting him a lesser sentence it's about making sure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice.

Fairfax rape and Morgan Harrington's killer were linked by DNA before Hannah went missing, before JM was even a suspect. Obviously, JM has a right to representation and a right to a fair trial...but....

Exactly. And someone will be defending him, KNOWING he stalked, raped and murdered those girls.

You don't KNOW much of this yet. That's why there needs to be a trial. But I guess you just think that anyone accused of murder should be thrown to the lions? What about rape? Sexual assault? Now what about burglary? What about embezzlement? What about a bar fight? A guy who's being mugged who fights back then gets accused of assault himself? What about the person who looks like the suspect in a crime and is identified by a witness, but who wasn't actually there? What about the guy whose DNA is all over the crime scene because he was dating the victim, but he was hundreds of miles away when she died? What about the guy whose "friend" said was at the crime scene, because he wanted to get back at him?

We need a trial. And he needs a competent lawyer to defend him. It's the bedrock of our democracy.

Are you intentionally being obtuse or do you not know anything about this particular case?

I'm not the PP, but you are the one who seems obtuse. You seem to think that some criminals don't deserve representation because of the heinousness of their crimes. And that's not the way that the judicial process works, nor is it supposed to. There's a reason that Lady Justice is shown as being blindfolded.

You seem concerned that a black man is going to get off lightly for raping and killing white women in Virginia. I don't think you have anything to fear on that front.

WTF are you talking about?
Race is totally irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about him not deserving representation based on the way our justice system is set up.
I said, ONCE AGAIN, that if evidence comes to light, as it's looking like it will, that proves his monstrous acts, that a person who defends him must be lacking in morality. Not sure how to make it any clearer.

NP. You are a reductionist simpleton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the bottom of this article in the comments section on poster claims that she knew Jesse Matthew and his father was alcoholic who beat him. Who knows but I imagine he was probably abused in some way to turn into such a monster. Dad should join his son in jail.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/neighbors-of-jesse-matthews-mother-speak-out-about-multiple-investigations/29263116?item=1

It's probably violence passed down through the generations. It's what they know and experience.

Be careful that you are not slandering the dad by repeating unproven gossip.

The son will do plenty of shaming just by being himself. No need to worry about slandering dear ol dad.

If this is true, the tragedy is exponential. So very sad. I'm sure will be used by defense attorney, again, if true.

So if his dad was an alcoholic and beat him, it excuses him raping and murdering people?

Whoever defends this guy is slime. Is his original attorney still with him, anyone know?

Shut your ignorant mouth. The right to representation belongs to everyone, not just innocent people. That is one of the bedrock principles of this country and what sets the US apart from a lot of other places. It's easy to represent those to have virtue; it's much harder to do what his attorney will have to do. And while I could not be a criminal defense attorney, I'm glad there people who are. Because, everyone gets the chance to put the state to prove their case. And that is absolutely as it should be. You want to be a proud American? You should be proud of this part of it.

+1

+2

+3

+ another one. This is one of the touchstones of our country's principles, and how the justice system functions. In no way does having an attorney diminish a criminal's penalty. If you want him to NOT have an attorney, or if you think all attorneys who are good people should decline to represent guilty people, you should consider moving to a place where they still stone people to death.

If he is prove guilty via forensics then yes, I think an attorney who attempts to get him a lesser sentence in exchange for money and publicity I'd despicable. I'm not saying he doesn't have the RIGHT to an attorney.

NP here. Are you really this clueless? Do you not understand how the criminal justice system works? And that it works that way to protect people from being wrongly convicted. You don't just get a hit on DNA and have the right to lock someone up. There are all sorts of things wrong with that 1) how do you make sure that the DNA is not contaminated? 2) how do you make sure that there isn't an innocent explanation? That's what a trial is for and he absolutely has the right to a trial and until that occurs he is innocent until proven guilty as much as you have already sentenced him. I for one am very happy to have this kind of legal system here and you should be too in case you ever get arrested for a crime -- whether you did or did not do it. It's not just about getting him a lesser sentence it's about making sure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice.

Fairfax rape and Morgan Harrington's killer were linked by DNA before Hannah went missing, before JM was even a suspect. Obviously, JM has a right to representation and a right to a fair trial...but....

Exactly. And someone will be defending him, KNOWING he stalked, raped and murdered those girls.

You don't KNOW much of this yet. That's why there needs to be a trial. But I guess you just think that anyone accused of murder should be thrown to the lions? What about rape? Sexual assault? Now what about burglary? What about embezzlement? What about a bar fight? A guy who's being mugged who fights back then gets accused of assault himself? What about the person who looks like the suspect in a crime and is identified by a witness, but who wasn't actually there? What about the guy whose DNA is all over the crime scene because he was dating the victim, but he was hundreds of miles away when she died? What about the guy whose "friend" said was at the crime scene, because he wanted to get back at him?

We need a trial. And he needs a competent lawyer to defend him. It's the bedrock of our democracy.

Are you intentionally being obtuse or do you not know anything about this particular case?

I'm not the PP, but you are the one who seems obtuse. You seem to think that some criminals don't deserve representation because of the heinousness of their crimes. And that's not the way that the judicial process works, nor is it supposed to. There's a reason that Lady Justice is shown as being blindfolded.

You seem concerned that a black man is going to get off lightly for raping and killing white women in Virginia. I don't think you have anything to fear on that front.

WTF are you talking about?
Race is totally irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about him not deserving representation based on the way our justice system is set up.
I said, ONCE AGAIN, that if evidence comes to light, as it's looking like it will, that proves his monstrous acts, that a person who defends him must be lacking in morality. Not sure how to make it any clearer.

NP. You are a reductionist simpleton.

Good one!