I'm still having trouble reconciling yesterdays verdict. Could it have been simply a case of four of the six defense attorneys doing a better job then the other two? Was the evidence against the two convicted officers that much worse than the rest? Perhaps after nearly two months of sitting in jury box and going over thousands of pages of evidence, hundreds of hours of testimony and endless scores of expert witnesses, maybe the jury was lost? Take a look at this question the jury sent to the judge just before they came back with the verdict and draw your own conclusions...
Question From the Plantation Cops Mortgage Fraud Trial Jury
The jury asks:
Can a defendant be not guilty of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and/or wire fraud and yet be guilty of mail fraud & wire fraud?Does that make any sense to any of you? Considering the nature of the crimes in question, the question makes no sense, yet it's a perfect example of the jury's state of mind, at least in my opinion.
Regardless, moving on to a comment left by one of our esteemed readers this morning...
Anonymous said...Thanks for that. I'll leave off with congratulating the fine defense attorneys who did an excellent job exonerating their clients, Deric Zacca, Roger Cabrera, Steven Potolsky, Michael Dutko, Marc Fagelson, Jayne Weintraub and Anthony Livoti. Well done, brilliant work. Best of luck to officers Joseph Lagrasta, Casey Mittauer, Daryl Radziwon and FBI agent Robert Depriest and their families. I hope they're able to get their lives and careers back together and put this whole ugly ordeal behind them.
what fine words of wisdom do you have now jerky
As far as the other two defendants that were found guilty, John Velez and Joseph Derosa, in light of the crimes they were convicted of, we can only hope the court is lenient with their sentences.