Any viewer who truly wants to evaluate the evidence and substantial challenges raised on appeal by Routier and Jones, they should read the state and federal court appeals online....
Everybody enjoys watching a variety of interesting tv shows...and this program IS entertaining. However, in addition to the Defendant, there the jurors, victims and their families, lawyers and judges, law enforcement, the presentation and quality of evidence, and the appellate courts that review this process.... ALL must be considered. In the real world of criminal trials (not Hollywood's version), the players don't get to cherry pick the facts and evidence.
The more interesting debate in the Jones case is whether a 19 year old should be on death row?? As far as the verdict and the case against Jones....guilty. Period. His issues on appeal were fully raised and soundly rejected.
As for Routier....she was convicted on the blood evidence and the absence of any evidence (DNA or other) that another person was there to do this crime. Her changing stories cannot possibly explain the crime scene evidence and the 911 call. This show practically ignored those issues entirely. The unfortunate "silly string" incident is a red herring but was shamefully overplayed by the DA and damaging to the defense. That's just my two cents but, at least it is based on reviewing facts and evidence from the appellate briefs, not just putting a "maybe innocent??" spin on two cases for a transparent anti-death penalty agenda.
The more interesting debate in the Jones case is whether a 19 year old should be on death row?? As far as the verdict and the case against Jones....guilty. Period. His issues on appeal were fully raised and soundly rejected.
As for Routier....she was convicted on the blood evidence and the absence of any evidence (DNA or other) that another person was there to do this crime. Her changing stories cannot possibly explain the crime scene evidence and the 911 call. This show practically ignored those issues entirely. The unfortunate "silly string" incident is a red herring but was shamefully overplayed by the DA and damaging to the defense. That's just my two cents but, at least it is based on reviewing facts and evidence from the appellate briefs, not just putting a "maybe innocent??" spin on two cases for a transparent anti-death penalty agenda.