6 ms·
Th jury for the trial for the crimes they never charged him with? Maybe they didn’t have evidence of a crime if they didn’t charge him. What is your reasoning
by alex_young 3y ago
Th jury for the trial for the crimes they never charged him with? Maybe they didn’t have evidence of a crime if they didn’t charge him. What is your reasoning?
- tptacek 3y agoThat they had substantial evidence of his intent to traffic (see the other comment on this thread that tracked down the NE Supreme Court case, which cited even more evidence), and probably would indeed have arrested him if he didn't fork over the cash. I feel like I've been pretty clear about this.
- alex_young 3y agoHe didn’t fork over his cash. They confiscated it under his objection. If they had evidence of a crime they would have charged it.
- tptacek 3y agoNo, that's not always true.