What conflict of interest exists?

They weren't tried in Tyrone and every possible juror that the defense wanted to be stricken, was removed.

This case should have never been tried in this judical circuit, on the grounds of finding a jury that could be impartial to either side. Come on this thing has been in the news for sometime up and leading to the play by play to the court date... Was the jury sequestered during the trial???? Anyhow I am sure An appeal is in the work as we speak. After all thats what makes America Great Guilty until proven innocent.........To be continued.....BLESS

I had only heard of his arrest, nothing else. It's possible to find a jury on this judicial circuit (mainly because it includes Spalding, Pike, Upson, and Fayette) so there's no reason that a jury wouldn't be "impartial".

To prove rape you have to show two things;
1) That the sex act did occur
2) That it was against the will of the victim

The Prosecution did not need physical evidence (semen, pubic hair, etc...) because the Defense admitted that a sex-act did occur.

The only thing left to debate in a rape trial was that the victim did not consent, OR consent was withdrawn sometime during the sex and the male did not stop.

Sorry - I guess the part of the crime I don't feel was proven was that the victim did not give her consent or withdrew her consent. Every single person, and more coming forward every day as they hear about the case, can remember her bragging about the sex - even giving graphic details about it. I'm sorry - it didn't become rape until her parents found out she was still dating Mr. Williams, last spring. The story also kept changing in court - I was present for the trial. Her written statement that was read stated that she told everyone and nobody believed her. Then, she testified that she told nobody, until her parents when they came to retrieve her from Ga. Tech, because she was again in trouble w/ her parents for continuing to date somebody they didn't approve of. THEN, she later testified that she told nobody until she told her then boyfriend. So, which was it - everybody and nobody believed her, OR parents first, OR boyfriend first? She didn't even know the day of the week that the supposed event happened. Couldn't remember if it was Friday, Saturday or Sunday. I'm also a little confused because she testified that after he arrived and he sat on the couch, she sat next to him and then she said she needed to go upstairs and turn of the TV? How many teenagers have ever worried about turning off the TV? UNLESS, she wanted to be sure she could hear her parents if they returned, so she could get him out of there so she wouldn't get in trouble? She also testified that (after he was not successful being on top)he tried to arrange her "on top of him", why didn't she try to run? Seems if he was on his back with no pants on, trying to position her "on top", she could have run like hell. OR how when he put her "on her stomach" on the "carpet" (not a couch or anything), he could force oral sex? Is that even physically possible for a man with her on the floor? I can't figure that one out. Did he force her teeth apart or keep them apart? And even if he somehow managed that one, why didn't she bite him? Sorry to be so graphic, but none of it adds up to me.

because of the previous charges of Molestation when he was 14. Even a jury full of MORONS wouldn't have found him guilty without his previous record. Were the details of that case brought out in this case or just the fact that he plead guilty to the charges?

What difference does it make you say? Well, Molestation includes a broad range of activities under the law. What if a person were babysitting a kid and that kid pooped all over themselves and the sitter had to clean them up and bath them all over? That bath would include cleaning of the genitals. Technically if the kid told someone that the sitter touched their "privates" they would be correct. Technically that would constitute molestation. Or what if an 18 yr old and a 16 yr old had consentual sex, the parents found out and pressed charges? That 18 yr old could be convicted of Molestation and labled a sex offender. Maybe Zack had a slackass Lawyer for the previous case who convinced him and his parents to plead.

Knowing the broad stroke by which Molestation is painted, without knowing the details of the previous case I would have been hard pressed as a juror to find him guilty.

I don't think the details of the molestion were admissible. Jury aren't suppsossed to know the opinions of other juries. The only reason the molestion thing was allowed to be mentioned at all was because he plead guilty. (The only reason I think he plead guilty is because BigHammer mentioned it in his comment) But even though he plead guilty I am pretty sure the rules only allow the addmission that he was charged with a crime and that he plead guilty to that crime and no other details are allowed.

I hear what you're saying, Big Hammer.

and yet...even today, our own Representative in the state house, Matt Ramsey, is pushing his own fast-tracked legislation that redefines child molestation to include phone contact with an underage person, the so-called "Rape by Phone" bill.

You seem to know so much (or you think you do), mind telling everyone who you are?

The problem with this trial is that they did not prove that it was against the will of the victim. Quite the opposite actually, they basically called 4 witnesses liars over the word of the girl...who does not have the best reputation at all.{{{{{{EDITED & WARNED}}}}}}

While you may not agree that the State proved their case, the jury did and that's all that matters.

Do you seriously believe the State adequately proved that this young man raped the "victim"? The State did not present any actual evidence proving that Mr. Higgins raped this girl.(I use the term "girl" loosely. Anyone that would perpetuate such a lie under these circumstances is SUBHUMAN). The jury's decision to throw away this man's life was based solely on her shaky testimony. You're an idiot at best and a sadist at worst.

You obviously do not know much about this situation. Her father IS a cop.. and lets just say she wasn't the cleaneast girl in high school.

Secondly, she openly bragged about having sex with him... yet he is a predator? What rape victim do you know brags about the experience?

Please refrain from making anymore judgements about Zach...which you have no knowledge of who he is or what kind of person he is(except from this article)

First of all her dad is not a cop. he is a civil engineer. secondly, about a month after this happened we began dating. i asked her about the incident and she said it was all consenual. i am not friends with zach nor do i even like zach, but you don't mess with peoples lives because you screwed up. zach needs to appeal this.

during the trial? This piece of information might have kept Zach out of jail. "you don't mess with peoples lives because you screwed up". It seems like you kind of messed with Zachs life. You did not feel it necessary to come forth with this information?

i didn't know until today. a friend of mine called me and told me. now i feel like i gotta do something!

the more people that can attest Zach's innocence, the better his case for an appeal will be

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

I've heard people mention the appeals process.

Like it or not, Zach Higgins was found guilty by a jury of his peers to be guilty of the crime of rape and aggravated sodomy (two separate charges).

The appeals court will NOT listen to new testimony or allow new evidence to be presented before it.
They only deal with constitutionality.

The juvenile record was property subpoenaed and it passed the suppression hearing and was legally admitted into trial.

He doesn't have anything to fight and will be unable to persuade the Georgia Appeals Court to hear him.

What is your side in all this? I have read through this blog and I have seen you tell several people they are wrong but I haven't seen you offer any insight. What do you know that isn't in this article? Why do you think it is right that a jury convicted Zack with no evidence other than this girl's word?

I saw numerous errors in people's posts and I felt an obligation to enlighten them.

If we're going to have a fair debate, I want rumors and speculation to be quelled before they further taint our discussion.

The reason I am having a hard time with this is that a person was sentenced to 35 years in a case with no physical evidence. Just the word of a teenage girl. Now, I understand the legal process. I also took 12th grade governement. So leave your text book in your back pack. Pretend you were a juror in this case and tell me why voted to convict Zack Higgins. I am not trying to argue with you. I am simply trying to understand why your opinion seems so much different than the other people who also sat in the same courtroom.

He has plenty to fight, but the fight will, most surely, be a hard one because of the appeals process(which I know full well, thank you attempting to educate me...) i'm unsure as to why this post was directed at me...

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

I NEVER said her father was not a cop. I said her father was not the Sheriff of Fayette County. I know for a fact her dad is neither Randall Johnson or Wayne Hannah. She may not have been the "cleanest" girl in high school but that does not mean she was not raped. In fact the witnesses for the defense claimed she said "At least I lost my virginity to a hot guy". If she was dirty, it was after she was raped.

"At least I lost my virginity to a hot guy"

...If someone gets raped they don't try and turn it into a positive situation by saying "oh well, at least the guy was hot" THIS is a compliment...victims do not compliment their violators.

So please do not say she was raped again. You have insulted your own intelligence.
Thank you. Goodbye.

How can you say what a rape victim might say or do? Would you think that a women would keep a dress with semen stains on it and not wash it? Monica Lewinsky did. She was in a clear state of mind. I ask again, how can you say what a person that has been through a traumatic situation would say or do? I'm sorry if you are too young to remember Monica Lewinsky. Just Google it.

but when was Monica Lewisky raped? as far as i remember(and i AM old enough to remember!), her relationship with the former president was completely consensual...

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

You make my point for me. She had not suffered through a traumatic incident yet she did something that I believe most people would consider odd. This victim went through a traumatic ordeal. How can anyone say what she would have done or said given the circumstances?

and this makes your point how? since she wasn't raped, she was "in her right mind" as it was put...seems to me that making comments about the "hottness" of her "rapist" is something a girl who had been raped wouldn't do...in fact, most cases of rape, women can barely face their attacker, much less find them attractive...

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

If a person that has had consensual relations with a person could do something as out of the ordinary as keeping an article of semen stained clothing, then how can you criticize what a person that was a victim of the violent act of rape might say or do. I agree that in most cases of rape, women have a very difficult time coming forward about such attacks let alone seeing their attacker. The key word is MOST. Most does not mean all. Most means more do, than do not. In a world of 100%, 51% is most. That is only 51 out of 100.

Okay a) monica lewinsky had consensual relations with THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Don't you think that just maybe might have had something to do with the fact that she kept that dress??? b) keeping a stained dress is in NO WAY similar to what this girl was doing. Being a victim of rape myself, I know it took me years to even admit to MYSELF, nevermind other people! There is no way **** a rape victim would brag about what happened to them...rightvswrong is so set on convicting zach as guilty that he/she is pretty much saying that it is more likely this girl is so ****** that she would do something as sick as bragging about being raped than zach being innocent....******

We all get it. We know she was bragging about her intimate relationship until he dumped her. We get it.

This story will make people question every rape victim. It only takes one loose little tramp to take us back into the stone age. This is exactly the kind of thing crime victim advocates have been working to overcome.

Not the header per se, but the last sentence. This will go too far, all the Tweens in this blog will take this to the extreme.

"Your, yore, you're all idiots." (T.Floyd)

But i am afraid that we may not want to hear what the Lord has to say, in light of us squandering our existance.. As he raises his staff and wipes us all from the face of the Earth. Who knows he may begin again with the dogs and cats, or the cockroaches. Make no mistake about it, there will be no shortage of Heat where we are going.....BLESS

Amen to that... rape victims don't brag. The fact that none of her friends can testify that she was in any sort of distress says a lot.

I would first like to point out that his name is not spelled "Zack," it is spelled "Zach". I point this out only to show that you know nothing about Zach Higgins...only what you have been TOLD to believe. I have known Zach for basically my entire life. He has been my best friend for years and will continue to be in or out of prison. I was not able to attend the trial as I am away at school, so I don't know what all was said in that courtroom. What I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt is that Zach Higgins is not who you are being told to believe he is. I know nothing about his accuser, so I will say nothing to her detriment. However, I have spent countless hours on end with Zach. He is like my brother. Throughout the 18+ years that I have known him, he has never "demonstrated a clear pattern of not being able to take no for an answer". Zach Higgins is a loving son, a loving brother, and the best friend a person could ever ask for. Through many of life's hard times, he has been one of the few constants in my life who has stood by me, picked me up. He has always been a rock for me to stand on. There is nothing that this case can say that will make me change what I KNOW to be the truth about Zach. He is not a perfect human being, but neither am I, and nor are you. There are a lot of things Zach can blame himself for, but this is not one of them.

This is a case of the injustice that is the Fayette County justice system. No one is protected against it. If you do not want to see yourself or someone you love face the same injustice, you must stand up against this establishment and serve as the check that American citizens are supposed to be. We are the watchdog...it is our job to fight this injustice.

"demonstrated a clear pattern of not being able to take no for an answer". I apologize for this statement. I'm sure that the 4 year old girl he did the same thing to in 2002 did not say "no" to him. He told her they were "playing a game". Do you think that it is a mere coincidence that she would make an accusation in 2008 of him committing the same crime one year after he was off probation? She had no way of knowing that he was convicted of the same crimes until Monday morning when the evidence was introduced in court. I don't claim to be perfect but when I make a mistake, I stand up and say so. I'm not trying to change your mind. I know you love and care for your friend. You are a true friend to stand beside him through such a tough time. Even good friends make mistakes.

first of all, the accusation in the previous case came within weeks of the incident-not 2.5 YEARS later. second, why should he stand up and say he made a mistake if he's innocent? he's never denied the earlier incident and has always been remorseful for it. and as for good friends making mistakes, believe me ugadawg87 and i(along with all of Zach's friends) are not.

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

alright so i went to summer school and knew this guy pretty brief, never seemed like a bad person. but i am confused... so he raped a little girl a long time ago, and got convicted on those charges, and now another girl from just a few years ago says that he raped her? i mean im sure when the jury debated they all had in the back of thier minds that he has done this before, and im sorry but messing with a little girl is really messed up, so if he really did that then i feel like he should have to pay for what he did. now regarding the new charges, it really does seem like the girl is {{{EDITED AND WARNED FOR LANGUAGE}}} thats just trying to save her on butt, i dont know what happened with the fist charges or what actually went down, he wasnt in jail for it so... i dunno, but yea this new girl that is saying she got raped... she just sounds like shes not telling the truth. its really sad that guys have to watch out who they have sex with because one day the girl could get all mad and decide to "cry rape". were going to have to start getting all the women we sleep with to sign a consent form. bring two things to bed guys, a condom and a consent form.

If you are innocent you should not stand up and say that you made a mistake. You should however stand up and at least say that you are innocent. The time to say "I did not do it" is during the trail not when the jury is leaving the court room.

Zach has ALWAYS maintained his innocence, from beginning to end of this case...

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

innocent to the charges in front of a judge. He NEVER said "I did not do it" in front of the jury until they were exiting the court room after handing down the verdict.

his life does exist outside the courtroom, and if you how court works, you don't just get to say whatever you want to say. i know you've read the rest of the posts here by now: he didn't do it. end of story.

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

I don't think it is prudent of me to continue to post on this article as I am so close to the individual, but I will leave you with one more statement.

Again I point out that you know only what you have been made to believe about either of these cases. It sounds to me you have much faith in the purity and sanctity of the American justice system. Unfortunately, it would be naive to believe that everything they tell you is "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." This is not the way things always go unfortunately. This is a prime example of why we as American citizens must perform our roles as watchdogs of the political establishment. This is not the end of the case, and you will eventually know the truth.

Also, she had many ways of knowing about the previous case as it was not entirely a secret.

I hope that you stand by your claim to admit when you make a mistake and admit you are making a mistake now in believing this man is guilty when the truth comes out.

Would at the least in light of certain circumstances, would warrant a review of the case, for indiffrences and conflicts of intrest, that may have not come to light in these preceedings. Im sure this is not the end game, and yes it is unfortunate for both parties involved, for this will follow them for the rest of their lives....PEACE...

No, I do not think he was sheriff of Fayette County or anything related. But you are right, there is no proof at all.

I heard the sheriff rumor because her dad has close ties with the officials. I'm pretty sure the judge included. But hey?

Like was stated before, the father is a civil engineer and is not friends with the judge or anyone in jury.

The only thing missing is our local justice system. Apparently they were not present at the trial.
Jacqueline A. Powers

I have no dog in this as he ole saying goes, but having a CRUSH on someone surely doesn't grant him or any other male to expect oral sex. If it wasn't rape, then why did this young lady come forward knowing that she would be trashed not only by the defense lawyer, but by everyone with an opinion?

As for being nearly impossible to force oral sex on someone, given we don't know what was said to her or what he might have used to threaten her into the act, we'll never know. We were not there, 3 people know for sure what happened that day, the 2 young peoiple involved and GOD. Being I am not a woman, i can not say she had to reason to conceal this for 3 years, given the hell she is going through on the net and in her daily life once all of the details concerning this incident came to light.

The legal system has this matter,The jury heard all the evidence, its time to let the system runs it course, in the appeals stage, if there is grounds for such action. We'll wait and see....

The reason the girl came forward is because her parents caught her in bed with a guy and they wanted to know why she is so clingy with guys. She said she is so clingy because she was raped in high school. They asked who and she said Zach Higgins off the top of her head, because she doesn't like Zach. She could care less about what happens to Zach. She used Zach as a scapegoat to get out of a sticky situation with her parents. So sad she can watch him exit the courtroom for 35 years without parole with no remorse at all. She is a terrible person.

Mr. Higgins was NOT sentenced to 35 years without parole.

If he behaves (or the prison becomes overpopulated) he'll be released much early.

I don't think that is true. It is a federal crime and I do not think parole is an option. I could be wrong..but it sounded to me like he would be unable to get out early.

Mr. Higgins was tried in Superior Court which is State, not Federal.

State or federal(which it is a state case), he was sentenced without parole

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

at least she has anonymity. her name and reputation aren't the ones being dragged through the mud here(i do realize some bloggers have made comments about her, but the paper itself has not).

i agree that having a crush on someone doesn't give the other person the grounds for rape, but given all evidence, she wasn't raped, she is simply "crying wolf" after the fact. i would feel some level of doubt at this point if even ONE person had claimed she was distraught or upset by the alleged rape at the time, but all i hear is a teenage girl who wanted to sleep with a guy and did and then cried rape when her parents found out.

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

for an "accusation" of date rape? Was there any DNA evidence? Photos of forced sexual contact on the victim? There has to be EVIDENCE to get 35 yrs in prison - wouldn't you think?? If not, this is insane.

Someone call Oprah or CNN Investigates! (I'm serious)

If this was a regular date rape case involving two adults I would probably agree with you. But this was a case involving an adult and a minor with 5 years difference in age. Also when you take into account that this Higgins guy has history invovling sexual crimes I think the sentence is perfect. Because this guy may or may not be a rapist but he is definably a child molester who would have done it again.

yeah whatever he did with this new girl really, like whatever... {{{{{{{{EDITED}}}}}}} zach was in the wrong place at the wrong time, but the other case is pretty messed up maybe since he didnt do anytime for that... KARMA no he gets 35 years for date rape

he did serve time for the previous charge, despite the way it may be presented.

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

I'm glad I went to high school in the 70's because we would have all went to jail!

Not a rapist but definably a child molester?

I guess my grandfather was a child molester when he married my grandmother . She was 14 he was 20.

Originally I misunderstood the article. I thought he was 21 when she was 16. I changed my opinion almost imediatley. My 2nd post is about 30 posts down from this one now. 14 and 20 might have been ok for your grandparents but I wouldn't recomend trying that in todays world.

This Zack kid got screwed and if half of what the kids are saying is true then a lot more should have been done. For example: Why didn't Zack's lawyer talk to the boyfriend that has been on this site? Seems to me that he should have been one of the first five kids interviewed. The judge wasn't the only one who droped the ball here. Lawyers are all dirt bags. If Zack didn't use a public defendant I bet his parents dropped $100,000.00 and this guy did a half assed job.

I like what Cal Beverly said about Johnnie Caldwell the last time Caldwell was up for re-election:
"Johnnie Caldwell is no favorite of mine, from the time he was D.A. until now, when he wants another term as superior court judge. Caldwell often is rude and overbearing, brusque and just plain wrong on the law often enough to cause lawyer tongues to wag about his storied reversals at the appellate level. "

Books have been written (notably "If You Really Loved Me") about Caldwell's lack of judicial demeanor and pro-prosecution bias.

Caldwell got a wake-up call in the last election, he got beaten in Fayette county but won the good-ole-boy vote in Pike/Upson/Griffin to keep his paycheck.

Part of Caldwell's problem was that he botched FIVE child molestation cases earlier this decade. The worst case was a mother and father both molesting their three children. Sick, sick, sick. Caldwell threw the father in prison, but let the mother go....then gave custody of the kids back to the child molesting mother. You can imagine what happened next.(In fairness to Caldwell, he admitted that was this custody decision was the single worst mistake he ever made from the bench).

Perhaps Caldwell is throwing the book at underage convictions to dispell his soft-on-child-molesters rep.

Oh, and remember when the 30-something Starrs Mill teacher had sex with an underage student? Three years probation for the teacher.

Of course, the teacher happened to be female...
(I wonder if ole Johnnie gave her a wink while he sentenced her)

Right on Sniffles. OMG...there is so much to add on to your post about Caldwell. He seems to have tightened his act up a bit since that Mr Osek guy ran against him and exposed him as the scumbag he is. Anyway.... I wonder if his daughters boyfriend is remorseful for knifing her ex and getting off. I think of couple of his complimenters should search the Citizen Archives and discover more about this character.

Of course, the teacher happened to be female...
(I wonder if ole Johnnie gave her a wink while he sentenced her)

Hmmmmmm wonder if he wrote in her file "Think she would settle for a lap dance"?

HONK IF YOU ARE PAYING MY MORTGAGE

Mr. Caldwell is in public office; however, his daughter is not. Did the "daughter's boyfriend" really knife the ex? Or was the story completely different? The boyfriend was actually innocent of any wrong doing. The entire incident was very sad. Only Jesus Christ can heal this type of pain. Please, Mr. Real, check out the archives of other search engines (news sources) before making this type of comment. I have read your blogs for several years. I usually find most of your comments to be funny and insightful. Please accept my comments with my utmost respect.

...time to vote him out, for good.

William Stallsworth
Child Molester
$180,000 bond
never showed for court
Caldwell gave bondsman multiple extensions
nothing else ever happened
??????

Caldwell ain't never gonna be beat. Put your wallet up. The lawyers fear him. Nobody is gonna mess with him in the courthouse. So he missed a few. Most times when the press is around he will hammer the perp. Bring in a bedwetter judge from Decatur for a few months and you guys would be yearning for Johnny.

They were only a year apart when the situation occurred in 2005-he was 17 and she was 16. The Citizen didn't do a very good job of representing that.

Ahavah "Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

oh ok, he is 21 now. Yeah your right 35 years is a really long time for a date rape situation where there isn't any evidence. Just her word versus his. Hell last week a guy only got 10 years for nearly killing a baby and the week before a guy got 5 for actually killing somebody. The jury probably convicted him on his history. They heard child molestion and it was over.

that there was something the jury heard that was not reported by this news paper.
I cannot find myself finding this young man quilty based on the evidence that was reported.
It looks as if he was convicted based on his past history.
This looks like a case of a young girl that was in trouble with her parents and chose to cry rape to get herself out of trouble.
Why she cried rape months later after an altercation about a current boyfriend though does not make good sense to me.
Something is missing here. I hope what is missing is information that the jury heard that we are not getting. If not , she just stole this young mans life in order to not be in trouble with her parents for a few moments or days.

Love simply, Love generously,
Care deeply, Speak kindly and
Leave the rest to God.

I've always been a very strong advocate of "'No' means 'No'. Period."

Having said that I am very troubled that at least two witnesses testified under oath that the victim bragged about having sex with the accused.

A 35 year sentence seems excessive.

Exactly. There's no evidence except her word against his and that is a ridiculous basis for 35 years without parole...

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."

Date rape sucks.

You can't let it go unpunished but you can't put some guy in jail every time a girl cries wolf either. But 35yrs, thats a little harsh. This guy was sentenced based on past accusations.

Based on all the info I have read here, this fellow deserves another trial...With a different judge! How do you convict when she bragged about it to her friends?!?! Huge miscarriage of justice.
I'm just say'n...

Judges don't convict in jury trials. He was convicted of rape by the jury after having previously admitted to a separate incident of child molestation.

Apparently, you'd like child molesters and convicted rapists to get shorter sentences.

What's wrong with you people?

Yeah, way to state the obvious captain obvious, and you obviously knew what was meant..... Judges determine the sentencing. So what if it wasn't said like that. Maybe your the dumb one for taking it a different way. Everyone knows that, and you found it worth your time to point it out and make yourself look like a prick. Some peoples children. I swear.

but prove that he did it, don't convict him because he made a very bad decision before.

that jury would not have convicted him without the earlier incident which he already served time for...since when do we pull double jeopardy and make someone pay for the same crime twice?

Ahavah

"Despite treason after treason, and sabatoge after sabatoge, God's empire of light never falls into total eclipse. Satan wages a futile war."