🚀 go-pugleaf

Bud wrote:

> Riddle <riddle@no.spam> wrote in article
> <MPG.feefc29aed6149698968b@news.infi.net>...
>
> > it is a more common and accepted practice to
> > hold trials of multiple crimes resulting from the same incident
> > concurrently rather than consecutively. This is to help ensure a fair
> > trial and also proves to be more cost effective.
> >
> Just because something "is more common and accepted practice" does not mean
> that there is any requirement to continue that practice in each and every
> case.

In fact there were some potent reasons for moving the case to Colorado as a
means of achieving a fair trial. Venue decisions and jury pools are intimately
linked.

Oklahomans may have wanted ( and perhaps rightly so) a lynching - but Americans
got an affirmation of the criminal justice system in action.

Did they try the Unabomber in Helena. Montana? Did it make any difference in
the outcome? Consider he committed multiple federal crimes - many from one
location. what is important is that he won't get that chance again.

We here in Colorado just wish healing for you in Oklahoma. Our jury followed
its instructions - let's move on.