Could you be impartial on Michael Devlin’s jury?
Michael J. Devlin, who’s being held in the Franklin County jail for the alleged kidnapping of 13-year-old William “Ben” Ownby, plead “Not Guilty” at his arraignment on Thursday morning.
Franklin County prosecutor Robert Parks said he would take the case to a grand jury next month, negating the need for a preliminary hearing.
Devlin also faces charges in neighboring Washington County for the 2002 kidnapping of Shawn Hornbeck, and St. Louis County prosecutor Robert McCullough is looking into possible charges in his county. Both boys were recovered last Friday inside Devlin’s apartment in Kirkwood.
After Thursday’s short court session, Devlin’s lawyers said they would seek a change of venue for his trial. One of the lawyers said that he thinks it would be next to impossible to have a fair trial in Franklin County.
If you served on the Michael Devlin jury, could you be impartial?
I don’t think any democrat would be. Knowing them they would probably tell him not to be a bad little boy and let him go, then blame the Republicans for not putting him in jail. Thank God the Republicans will get it it right the first time.
God is Great.
Probably not.
I could, however, listen to the evidence and be persuaded by it. That is what jurors are supposed to do. I have sat on a jury and listened to lawyers strive mightily to convince me of two completely opposite set of “facts” at the same time. It’s an interesting challenge to use reason and logic to consider the evidence, and only the evidence, and decide if this person is guilty or not guilty of the charges brought against him… and ONLY those charges.
Doesn’t matter, either way it is going to be a circus.
I must admit that initially I would be ecstatic to have the opportunity to find Devlin guilty. However, I have faith in the Criminal Justice system and believe that the evidence, not my personal feelings, would lead to a conviction.
Probably not, considering the great deal of exposure both nationally and especially locally. It’d likely prove too difficult to divorce preconceived notions from the information presented at the eventual trial.
Touched by His Noodly Appendage.
blahblahblah you sir are a moron, i do not have pitty on you but i have pitty for you because you are not capable of realizing just how moraly defunct you are.
As far as the question at hand no i could not be fair or unpartial to Mr Devlin. He needs to be handed over to the parents of Shawn and Ben and let them serve the justice that needs to be handed out.
I am confident I could be totally impartial. I don’t care how they kill the SOB.
Change of venue is a bunch of crap. The constitution says “impartial jury” (i.e. people who don’t have an ax to grind), not a group of 12 idiots who don’t know what’s going on in the world.
Just another lousy liberal idea to help get dirtbags off the hook, and give innocent people the worst possible jury to hear their case. I was on a criminal jury before and I sure as heck wouldn’t have wanted my livelihood to have depended on those bozos.
Sincerely,
I could be. We don’t know the ‘truth’. All we know is what we’ve been told in news stories and watched on Oprah. I would want to hear the facts–all the facts–before making up my mind.
More than that, every person in this country is due a fair trial; to have the facts heard by a panel of their peers; a panel that isn’t required to be ignorant, only open to hearing the story, and the facts. Then, and only then, do we make a judgment.
I would strongly suggest the district attorney ask the families to refrain from taking their kids to every talk show and news program in the entire free world. Frankly, such behavior doesn’t impress me.
No. It’s that simple for me.