Article: "Convicting Darren Wilson Will Be Basically Impossible"

[cleduc]

23. This sentence from the article is what rattled me:

"As long as there is still the slightest possibility that Wilson acted in his own defense, Missouri law favors Wilson"

Maybe I'm getting hung up on semantics.

With DNA evidence, the possibility it is wrong is often quoted as something in the order of 1 in 13 billion. That's nearly as slight a possibility as you could find. But jurors often accept DNA as damning evidence - in spite of the fact that there is the "slightest possibility" it is wrong - because to them, 1 in 13 billion is so slight, it's not reasonable doubt - it's highly, highly unlikely.

In spite of whatever evidence is piled up against Wilson, the slant of that article suggests in Missouri, one racist on the jury can easily cling to Wilson's self defense claim having the "slightest possibility" it's true and it's game over. It should relate more to reasonable doubt - not unreasonable "slightest possibility".

I realize a racist on the jury could ignore all reason regardless. But "slightest possibility" gives them something easier to cling to.

It frightens me that the prosecution could put on a good case and fail because of "slightest possibility". From that, I'd fear Rodney King II: riots in Ferguson causing damage and potentially death.

This distresses me. I'm left to wonder if this is really justice.