BY LAURA BAUER AND KAITLYN SCHWERS lbauer@kcstar.com
LINKEDIN
GOOGLE+
PINTEREST
REDDIT
PRINT
ORDER REPRINT OF THIS STORY
Some of the bones found two days ago in rural Cass County have been identified as those of missing Raymore woman Jessica Runions.
Kansas City Police notified the Runions family Wednesday evening, according to a release from the Cass County Sheriff’s Office. Runions, 21, was last seen on Sept. 8.
Forensic specialists were called in after a mushroom hunter found human bones Monday afternoon near a quarry in rural Cass County. One skull was found the first day of the search and a second the day after.
Originally Posted by RedinTexas:
There is doubt and there is reasonable doubt. If doubt is not reasonable, then it is ok to convict. Therefore, it is ok to convict even with some doubt and there is not 100% certainty.
A 'reasonable' doubt is a doubt based upon reason, common sense and experience. The prosecution always tries to argue that it does not mean 100% or 'absolute' certainty. And I always agree with them.
But I explain to the jury that reasonable means it's based upon reason, common sense and experience. And I give this example:
Let's say that my defense is that aliens came down and inhabited Dan Defendant's body so that to all appearances, Dan committed this crime. In actuality, though, he was under control of aliens and he is therefore not guilty. Can the prosecution disprove that? No, they cannot. And they do not need to disprove that theory because, Hollywood aside, there is no reason, common sense or experience that would ever suggest such a preposterous notion.
But can you doubt because some people were mistaken in what they saw? Maybe some people have a bias against Dan Defendant. Maybe there is a reasonable explanation that fits the facts just as well as guilt. To convict, you must have no doubts at all along those lines. You cannot say, "I think Dan did it." You cannot say, "Dan probably did it." You cannot even say, "Dan most likely did it." If you say, "Dan most likely did it," you just found Dan not guilty. No, in order to convict, every last one of you must agree that Dan did it, that you are firmly convinced he did it and there is no doubt based upon reason, common sense or experience that would suggest otherwise. Otherwise, the law requires you to say 'not guilty.' [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rainbarrel:
How do other inmates successfully rehabilitate dealing with people like that.
"rehabilitation" is only one sentencing goal. Other sentencing goals include community condemnation of the crime, the need to promote respect for the law, deterrence of others and the accused, and the need to isolate an individual to protect society.
By the time you get to crimes of this nature and sentences of this length, rehabilitation is way, way, way down the list of sentencing goals. Sentences of this type and length focus upon community condemnation and protecting society by isolating dangerous individuals. [Reply]
There's no doubt in my mind that scum murdered both girls. That said, the evidence in the Kopetsky was probably sparse just due to the age of the case. Manslaughter is probably the best that they could prove. The Runions death may have had a little more evidence, so that's why murder 2 was possible. Have those convictions run consecutively. [Reply]