I agree to a point and as an ex-cop..........

I can tell you that the reason for citing an alternative, but lesser charge (as was the case with each of the supplying alcohol to minors counts) is that you are unsure of aconviction on the substantive charge but 100% certain of a conviction on the lesser charge.

The conspiracy and abuse charges are clear cut, he's either guilty or not, but i am amazed that he wasn't found guilty on any of the alternative supplying alcohol charges.

What we shouldn't forget in all of this is that under the American system, the defence has more influence in jury selectiom than the prosecution does and therefore defences spend huge amounts of time and money to get the best possible jury for the defendent.

Posted By: Kirrie, Jun 14, 11:09:27