Quote:
Originally Posted by G1911
I-am-not-a-lawyer but wouldn't the car chase only help if they had charged him for evading the law/running from the police or whatever the technical charge for not complying is, and not the murders themselves? Wanting to be free isn't proof one did the original crime.
Unpopular opinion probably, but you should be allowed to run from the cops. Ain't nothing more natural than a mans desire to be free, doesn't feel like a just crime in and of itself.
|
I don't remember all the details now, but I think a good argument could have been made that his flight was suggestive of guilt.
The United States Supreme Court has long held that evidence of flight after committing a crime is relevant to establish a defendant's consciousness of guilt, even though not sufficient in and of itself to sustain a conviction. See, e.g., Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492, 499, 17 S.Ct. 154, 41 L.Ed. 528 (1896); Alberty v. United States, 162 U.S. 499, 510-11, 16 S.Ct. 864, 40 L.Ed. 1051 (1896); Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 124-25, 120 S.Ct. 673, 145 L.Ed.2d 570 (2000).