It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Yes we need to cross examine the witnesses first.
The phrase, "the invisible gorilla," comes from an experiment created 10 years ago to test selective attention. In it, study participants are asked to watch a video in which two teams, one in black shirts and one in white shirts, are passing a ball. The participants are told to count how many times the players in white shirts pass the ball.
Mid-way through the video, a gorilla walks through the game, stands in the middle, pounds his chest, and then exits.
Then, study participants are asked, "But did you see the gorilla?" More than half the time, subjects miss the gorilla entirely. More than that, even after the participants are told about the gorilla, they're certain they couldn't have missed it.
Originally posted by crazydaisy
And if they were to set bail for Jared right now I suppose you would jump right down there and bail him out. There were numerous witnesses and maybe there is video evidence that hasn't been released (save that for the trail he deserves and will get).
Originally posted by ANOMALY502
reply to post by PlautusSatire
Those are two out of many eyewitness accounts, YES he is innocent until proven guilty, I differ with the OP's opinion about having to have a confession, or DNA evidence. When the time comes the witnesses will be put under oath in court and asked to identify the shooter.
Originally posted by alpha chino
Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, yes. But you act as if this guy is being railroaded when a whole crowd of people saw him do the shooting.
Innocent Until Proven Guilty!
Originally posted by eMachine
I think it's good to remember our 'justice process' right now, when alot of people seem to have a 'kill him now' attitude about all of this. IF (hypothetically) there is more to this story that we do not know, like some sort of mind control project, we'll never know if people are too quick to judge based on what the media tells them. How can he get an unbiased jury? Unfortunately, that's very unlikely.
Originally posted by MisterCrowley
reply to post by alpha chino
The MSM are not even saying the *alleged* shooter. The say it as a definitive.. They already have this man convicted.. I think personally they are messing this whole case up. With him being insane, crazy, not all there, mentally unstable, how in the world could someone send him to the chair and sleep at night?edit on 12-1-2011 by MisterCrowley because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Golf66
Several years ago I attended a course in the Army for Counterintelligence Agents (Sort of an Investigator) at one point in a lecture a guy walks across the stage and latter at the end of the lecture people are asked if they even saw him and if they did to describe him as a suspect - physically and what actions he took.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Show me the video of that happening, or I am sorry but you are ASSUMING IT based on preconceived notions and the media telling you so.
Look, I am almost certain that Jared will admit defiantly and proudly that he is guilty in court.
But our legal system was designed so that every citizen has a right to voice their defense if they so choose. Also, he has the right to admit guilt and cut to the chase.
Point is, the trial hasn't even started yet, and most people act like they know for absolute 100% sure that he is guilty and yet they have no proof. This is programmed into us because people take the media as gospel.