[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
While in many cases it might be reasonable to forgive a defendant acquitted by a jury of his peers, it is not with al-Arian. Regardless of whether or not the jury believed his actions constituted a specific legal violation by acting “in furtherance of” terrorist attacks, there is no mistaking what is in al-Arian’s heart.

[/ QUOTE ]



Our system doesn't allow for juries figuring out what is in someone's heart. They do, I'm sure, but juries are charged with rendering a verdict based on evidence - nothing else. If I'm on a jury and "know in my gut" someone is guilty, but the prosecution did not prove it, beyond a reasonable doubt - I've got no choice but to acquit. Supposedly.

A juror who decides to vote "guilty" because of his "feelings" or "suspicions," is no different than a cop who renders "street justice." Actually, I'd trust the cop's gut before the juror's.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, but there the author isn't talking about the jury convicting or not based on what is in al-Arian's heart--the author is talking about others forgiving al-Arian or not, regardless of the jury's verdict.