This is a genuine question.
I have a hard time with this. My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence, but my pessimistic side thinks this might have set a great example for CEOs to always maintain a level of humanity or face unforseen consequences.
P.S. this topic is highly controversial and I want actual opinions so let’s be civil.
And if you’re a mod, delete this if the post is inappropriate or if it gets too heated.
If I was in the jury I could be persuaded to push for jury nullification.
Just don’t use it by name, that is potential grounds for a mistrial.
The goal is to doubt everything the pigs say, because they’re corrupt as fuck.
Place doubt on evidence, on motivations, on testimony. Make it clear that there is insufficient evidence.
But also don’t say anything that would indicate bias against pigs, because that will absolutely get you booted during selection.