General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)and Martin reasonably defended himself, wannabe ended up in the disadvantage, panicked and shot.
This is how the two got close enough for a physical conflict.
I can't prove it though and neither did the state.
I think too many are incapable or unwilling to separate what they believe from what is proven and cannot or will not discern the difference between evidence supporting a conclusion and evidence proving one.
I also tend to think folks believe that presumption of innocence is simply not assuming guilt, they cannot or will not think of a subject as innocent, often citing such thinking as blaming the victim/taking away their presumption of innocence (despite the victim not being the one on trial), failing to properly compartmentalize and isolate the situation and prosecutors take full advantage pushing emotion and twisting empathy to get juries to focus on the victim rather than the facts of the case because their job is to win not find truth.