So, if the family also cries in court, would that also be bad?

Court Overturns 1995 Murder Conviction


SAN FRANCISCO � A federal appeals court has tossed out a 1995 murder conviction and ordered a new trial for a man convicted of killing his estranged wife's fiance. The court said buttons the victim's family wore at the trial may have influenced jurors.


Mathew Musladin, who is serving a life sentence, maintained that he acted in self-defense when he shot Tom Studer in 1994.


In ordering a new trial for Musladin, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday said the buttons, which showed Studer's picture, may have biased the jury.


"The buttons essentially argue that Studer was the innocent party and that the defendant was necessarily guilty," Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote.


But Judge David Thompson, in his dissent, said the buttons were a symbol of a family's grief.


In 1990, the San Francisco-based appeals court tossed a rape conviction on grounds that jurors might have been prejudiced because some trial observers wore pins that read "Women Against Rape."

Was there any objection raised in this case to the buttons? Did the judge give any instructions to the jury about them? How can this be reversible error. Do these judges think it came as a big eye-opener to the jury that the victim's family and friends were biased in his favor? These same jurors must have been stunned to learn that the defendant's family and friends thought he was innocent.

This is yet another example of ivory tower judges--who constantly stress the importance of jury decision making--rendering opinions based on the assumption that jurors are all mindless imbeciles who can't understand the simplest concepts that are so plain to the sage judiciary.

Makes one wonder if the Peterson case will be reversed because of the demonstrations and displays that were held outside the courthouse could possibly have influenced the jury.

And what about the demonstrations that have been going on during the Jackson case? Maybe the demonstrators should be removed to make sure that the jury is not biased by the exercise of the demonstrators 1st amendment rights. Seems like the judges just forget about the rights of the victims in these cases.