Quote:
Originally Posted by PennBF
It is kind of foolish to carry this any further. The last I read the State called for the death penalty. According to ABC when citizens were asked their opinion 85% said she was guilty. If the state wanted the death penalty and
most wanted her convicted I guess you could conclude a great majority wanted her "killed" in accordance with the state proposal. The jury of 12
said she had not been proved guilty and therefore should not die. They did not say she was innocent which is different. My point is that of the ones who want her "killed" as the state demanded it would only be so they feel better since the evidence, as per the jury was not there.  |
The state brings indictments to the trial. While each charge carries potential sentences, the actual sentence is determined during the penalty phase if the defendant is convicted. In this case, there were three felony charges, each of which has potential sentences, including death. The state did not "demand" death. It presented charges, tried to prove them to be true, and would then, if it won, have entered the penalty phase to argue which sentence would be appropriate. But the state doesn't determine the sentence, the judge and jury do.
Frankly, I don't believe the state ever considered that the murder 1 charge would stick. In fact, I remember a retired judge commenting that he was surprised the trial judge did not summarily dismiss the murder 1 charge before handing the case to the jury, since the state provided no evidence that supported that charge.