Who do you think the killer really was?

That show was pretty good but a couple things about it were stupid

1. How could Nas be so much of a dumbass and not thoroughly explain why he did or didn't do thing X?

2. The treatment Nas's family received would not happen in real life, and hardly anyone would even recognize Nas on the streets when he got out. He lives in NYC, not some bumfuck town in the middle of nowhere where everyone knows each other.

The brown guy

I kinda thought they were hinting at the possibility of it being Nas by bringing up his lack of remorse for those kids' injuries, and him questioning his own innocence on the stand.

I'm on the third episode...the kid is the most realistic retarded idiot in the history of fiction.
His situation its hilariously frightening, like it could happen to anyone.

yeah he's a retard.

Pakistanis and Indians hate each other

Who else here would suck on Chandra's toes and lick her butthole?

It quite literally could not of have been nas...

Unless he took a shower and cleaned all the blood off him and then put on jammies and passed out in the kitchen.

You dont stab someone 22 times and not get a drop of blood on you.

I just learned today that Andrea was played by the same chick as Tea on Skins

She's fucking hot, I wish we got to see her naked thick white ass

I think it's either Ray Halle Duane Reed

*ray halle or duane reed

It's not supposed to be a question, it's the finance guy. They literally have pictures of him walking to the house at 3 am...

In the last two episodes theshow shifts from casting doubt about NAs's innocence to the suspense of seeing if Nas will be convicted of a crime we know he didnt commit.

Even the prosecutor knows he didnt do it... this is all illustrated very well in the show...

Hung jury from that trial was unbelievable

well time to post this.
; ;

It doesn't matter

The moral of the story is that the system cares more about personal careers and bureaucracy, than real truth and justice.

And white people are evil or something

you think it's unbelievable that the jury was hung or that the prosecutor didn't push for a 2nd trial?

that's really sad, but Nas is an extreme beta

why would a girl like that randomly fall for an awkward Pakistani guy driving a taxi?

>this dumb

she didn't fall for him she just didn't want to be alone

yeah but she could have looked a little harder

well yea but know hes a semi-hardended drug addict

also that scene really hit me in the feels since i can only emotionally connect with other damaged women when on drugs

are you a damaged woman yourself?

and yeah I know he's a drug addict, but he probably talks to so few girls that he's taking this too hard.

yea I think they knew that it looked that way which is why they made him testify and become a total retard who bit at all the bait the prosecutor threw at him.

Without that there would have been zero suspense in waiting for the verdict

she's a damaged druggie, as long as nas met her minimum standard of attractiveness (he's actually fairly good looking) it's fine

she clearly enjoyed toying nas an his inexperience, it made her feel powerful and wanted etc

nah im a dude i just worded that badly

Why would Omar, who seems to legitimately care about Nas, get him hooked on heroin?

Didn't the defense look super weak, though?

>why would a whore get into the first taxi she sees and do drugs with and bang the driver

hmmm

i thought it was pretty clear that this bitch had a metric ton of issues

Hung. Defense was terrible and juries convict most of the time anyways.

Yeah that's true, now that I think about it it's not that far fetched. Other aspects of the show are pretty far fetched, though.

The show really made me wonder why someone wrongly accused and found not guilty or had the charges dropped wouldnt be reimbursed for all the money spent on legal fee's.

Like I guess you are in debt for life because you were in teh wrong place at the wrong time?

wtf?

Yeah I kinda can't picture them not convicting with that weak ass defense.

But doesn't it just take 1 juror disagreeing for a mistrial?

because omar is himself addicted and probably saw it as a way for nas to hate prison less

he thought he was helping him out

It was crack you tard.

You don't freebase heroin.

I think that firm payed for it. And you have a right to a public defender, I'm not sure how good they tend to be though.

You can smoke heroin. And it didn't look like crack, as it was powder and not rock.

Yeah good point.

No.. the cops failed to interrogate 3 suspects, Duane MO was literally stabbing people with a knife from their kitchen ayyy lmao, Box broke chain of custody... that is soo much reasonable doubt it's ridiculous.

you can absolutely smoke heroin

heroinhelper.com/user/admin/smoke.shtml

Also, one of the guys who testified had previously led to someone being wrongfully imprisoned.

Exactly, that's actually how most people start

Like tuturro said, once they got naz on the stand, their defense was non-existent.

Because Stone was claiming it was the only play he had left. And at worst she was going to lose her career while Nas had his (potentially) literal life on the line.

I thought it was crack at first, but in some scenes you can see that they're crushing up pills into powder. So it's probably oxy or something like that.

In the real world, a unanimous guilty verdict would have been reached in 5 minutes.

Juries rarely acquit.

He could have gave a way better testimony

I understand that. I'm guessing Chandra agreed to it too.

OJ Simpson, George Zimmerman, Freddy Gray cops, etc.

what does Chandra's butthole taste like?

why did chandra ever want to put nas on the stand?
i don't get why they made her act so stupid at the trial, it goes beyond inexperience, there was no possible way that would have benefitted him and the jury being evenly split based on that is total bullshit

Why do juries convict at such a high rate? Is it because they eat up the bullshit prosecutors feed them?

curry

probably cause they wanna go home

is it true that juries tend to be filled with people too dumb to come up with an excuse to not serve?

probably because most people who are in the criminal justice system are guilty.

most yeah, but not all

it was probably a lot worse before dna

yeah it was, but still most were guilty

>John Turturo movie

helllllllllllllllllllllllllllll nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Yeah I have to imagine most are guilty since the it usually won't go to trial if there's reasonable doubt that the suspect is guilty

Was anyone else hoping Freddy and Naz were gonna have gay sex?

What would happen if I was selected for a jury, sat through a trial, and the guy was obviously guilty, but I decided to vote for acquittal?

bump

it's kinda sad how only 2 or 3 people seemed to believe Nas

Naz did it. He blacked out on drugs and doesn't remember though.

then why weren't his clothes covered in blood? and why would he kill her?

Most people trust authority figures. They give more weight to cops and DAs just because. For their own mental health and well being, they want to think that the justice system gets it right, that the cops wouldn't screw up so badly that an innocent person is on trial for something so serious.

Also, most defendants don't take the stand. For good reason too, even if they're innocent, the prosecutor has experience in ripping people to shreds on the stand. It's easy for even innocent people to trip over their words and appear guilty on the stand. But at the same time, juries will always think - even though they're instructed not to - "wow if that guy's innocent, why doesn't he get up on the stand to say that?"

Probably started as some kinky sex games, she likes being cut and abused. But it wound up going too far and he just snapped and kept stabbing her even after she was dead. You don't wear clothes during sex.

yeah but if he was that fucked up, he probably wouldn't have been able to clean himself off like that.

As long as you don't tell the others that you're deliberately throwing the trial, there's absolutely nothing they can do. Just say over and over "I'm not convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt" and so on if the other jury members press you, which they will.

You can only be punished if you don't seem to be acting faithfully as a juror. So don't say you're voting not guilty because of your religion, your conscience, whatever. Don't mention jury nullification and so on, and they can't do shit to you. The whole legal system would collapse if the government started punishing jurors for voting not guilty when they seemed to be faithfully executing their duties as a juror.

So would that throw away the whole trial? What is the likelihood of retrial for the defendant?

It would really depend on the case. If they've got an "obviously" guilty guy, they might go for it again. But they might think - is our case really that solid if we had a mistrial before? Somehow the defense convinced at least one guy to vote not guilty (IIRC they aren't required to declare counts like they did in the show, that was actually very inappropriate of the judge). This also gives the defense leverage to get a pretty good plea deal, and now they also know all the tactics the prosecution is going to use.

Also to elaborate more, you are absolutely not required to explain your verdict as a juror. Your fellow jurors will obviously get pissed if you're the holdout, but legally there's nothing compelling you. And I warned against it, but even if you bring up jury nullification or matters of conscience, it's extremely unlikely you'll be punished. You'll probably have to deal with some shit which is why I recommend just keeping your mouth shut, but the moment the government starts punishing jurors for voting the 'wrong' way, the whole legal system falls apart. Generally people aren't going to vote not guilty for a murderer for the hell of it.

IMO it's better that 10 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man get punished.

Those guilty men will either turn their life around, or go back to jail for doing some other dumb shit, while it's very hard to get your conviction overturned once you're in prison.

So it's better to have 10 people out rapping and murdering people then to lock up a random muslim who won't ever really accomplish much in his life anyway?

I was actually kind of pissed when my mom got on a jury trial and voted guilty on some guy for murder. Basically he was some lowlife I guess, but he was driving his friend around, and stopped at a house where his friend went up and shot someone. So now because of blabla, the driver was also charged with first degree murder, and that's what the jury had to decide on. Legally, it was clear that he's technically supposed to go down for murder if the jury finds him guilty of him having an idea of what his friend would do, and the jury is instructed to vote on the law, not conscience.

But if I was on that jury, no way I'm sending that man to jail for first degree murder just because he was a driver. Doesn't matter even if he knew what his friend was going to do (it's unclear). Doesn't matter that the law 'says' what he did makes him just as responsible.

Ughh I've never gotten jury duty while I've been available. It's going to come up at the worst time for me, I know it. I've gotten 'lucky' so far and just not had to show up at all.

Damn that really sucks, there's no way you can really prove that the guy knew the murder was gonna happen. Hopefully the judge gave him a lower sentence.

Yes.

No the guy's in for life while the actual shooter took a plea deal and can expect to get out some day. Poor dude actually trusted in the justice system. He was probably thinking to himself "Well I didn't murder him, why would anyone convict me of murder? I'm going to fight this" But because he's a poor Mexican with loose gang affiliations, off to jail he goes.

No offense, but is your mom one of those non-free thinking types? And I'm surprised at that outcome, even a public defender should have been able to squash that case.

I think the plea deal thing is kind of fucked up, hard to explain why but it seems wrong

No she was actually crying for having voted guilty, she recognized it was fucked up, but juries are instructed in very specific ways of how they're supposed to vote and act. The law was the law and she felt convinced that he technically violated the law even if he didn't pull the trigger.

Basically, it's the law that in the commission of a crime, if anyone dies - even if it's your own criminal partner - all of the criminal participants can go down for murder. Now they basically believed that it was reasonable by the evidence provided that this guy had a good idea of what his buddy would do if he drove him over to that person's place, and so because of that, he's guilty of murder as well.

I thought being an acccomplice to a murder was a much lesser sentence than the murder itself

Agreed.

I dont get it

I'd fuck her, not do those things.

Shes a woman

>IMO it's better that 10 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man get punished.
You got that from that show 'the practice'. I remember they used to spout that line during adverts for it.

>dennis fucking reynolds