I will just say that I do not believe my interpretation of your remark was far off the mark as you continue on to say that the Nicaricos should apologize as that would be the "classy" thing to do. Just keep digging a deeper hole on this one. You certainly have a razor sharp ability to be critical of human beings in the worst of possible circumstances. I will just say- there but by the grace of Allah go thee.

By sick of rambling comments that go far beyond the topic on September 28, 2009 8:46 PM

If you look at how your comment was written, the one that Anonymous is commenting on, you actually said
"In the end the prosecutors brought undue shame on them and they left Naperviile (sic)."
The way that sentence is written reads exactly the way that Anonymous had interpreted it to read.

========================================================================================================================================

Anonymous and you are misinterpreting my sentence.

I did not say they left for that reason. Otherwise I owuld have said the prosecutors brought undue shame that led them to leave....or was the reason they left....or caused them to leave.

I was simply telling the story. One had no correlation to the other when I wrote it....at least in my mind. Maybe, I should have started a new sentence instead of using "and" to be a little more clear.

Bottom line is I write much here and quickly. I will not always choose the perfect words. But if you read what I wrote in context, you would not arrive at your conclusion.

Having said all that, I would have liked to see the Nicarico Family apologize to those who were wrongfully accused of killing their daughter. In the end, they believed these 3 guilty just as the prosecutors did. They made many statements condemning these 3 for the atrocity to their daughter.

If they had a conscience, I believe they would have expressed some kind of remorse. Two wrongs just don't make a right. They had 26 years to say they were sorry. They never said they were sorry for pursing and persecuting innocent men for decades.

Maybe in the early years due to the massive emotional distress one can understand why an apology was not forthcoming. But 26 years later, they should be able to say we are so sorry that 3 innocent Hispanics spent 12 years in jail and death row for no good reason.

Brian Dugan said he killed their daughter very early on in a hypothetical statment. Why would he say that if he did not do it. The prosecutors did not want to believe him because they used the wrongful prosecution to further their political goals. Why would the Nicaricos not believe Dugan's confession since it was corroborated by many things including the fact that he missed work that day and his car was seen by neighbors in the vicinity. He even borrowed a screwdriver from a neighbor that day if I recollect correctly.

I simply think it would have been classy of them to apologize. It does seem odd that they left town during the prosecution of the real killer. But hung around 2 decades to go after the innocent victims.

And keep in mind I am not on this site to be a conformist and/or win a popularity contest. I am here to express my true feelings regardless of what people think.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As far as going far beyond topic, well if you look carefully this thread had one post in nearly 3 months. if we have to go a little off topic to liven a dead thread, let it be. We got 6 posts in one day by going a little off topic. What is wrong with that?

You are not the Moderator....and don't try to be him either. If the Moderator thinks we are completley out of line he can delete the post without publishing it. He has done it on more than one ocassion so don't worry about how he is handling his own blog site.

I think he is doing an excellent job of moderating. If you don't like his moderating, he is not forcing you to blog on his site. It is all OPTIONAL.

CIJ Said "You can not be sensitive to one side and not the other. You apparently are not sensitive to the horrific plight of the Hispanics. May I ask why? "

Where in Anonymous's statement is there any mention at all of Hispanics? You as usual have read way too much into a comment. Nowhere did Anonymous make any comment on the Nicarico case itself. You obviously like to hear yourself talk/write. Since your comments are far beyond anything in Anonymous's comment.

If you look at how your comment was written, the one that Anonymous is commenting on, you actually said
"In the end the prosecutors brought undue shame on them and they left Naperviile (sic)."
The way that sentence is written reads exactly the way that Anonymous had interpreted it to read.
For someone who touts being such a good speller, writer, and fast typer, you didn't do your due diligence on that sentence alone.

Anonymous,
I did not say they were shamed into leaving town.

I said the proseutors brought undue shame on them.

The prosecutors lied to them and brainwashed them into believing 3 Hispanics killed their child. Being in the state of mind they were in, I don't blame them for not catching on quicker.

Sadly, they were in denial to the last day they left town.

While what happened to their daughter was horrific what happened to those innocents who were on death row for 12 years was also horrific.

Anyway, after all these years, I think the Nicaricos should have showed some compassion and class and issued an apology to the Hispanic victims. They made many wrongful accusations against them and called them many names but never said they were sorry even after 26 years. They attended every hearing and trial in their relentless determination to help the prosecutors convict them. At times they even pressured the prosecutors.

While you can never get over a loss of a young child, sometime within 26 years they should have found it in them to apologize to these Hispanic Victims. They left town and never issued an apology. They never said they were sorry about anything.

It seems to me they considered their daughter a precious child which she is and these Hispanic Victims trash which they are not.

You have to understand, Anonymous, just like it is a horrific to kill a child, putting innocent people on death row to rot is also horrific. These Hispanics were months away from being executed. Even the Illinios Supreme Court unpheld their convictions. It took a group form Northwestern Law School to stand up to the corrupt judicial system in Dupage who would have executed them.

You can not be sensitive to one side and not the other. You apparently are not sensitive to the horrific plight of the Hispanics. May I ask why?

Wow CIJ, you just don't have any semblance of an edit button, do you? Some of your comments and analogies have hit below the belt but to say the Nicaricos were shamed out of town is an unusual low, even for you. They lived here for many years after this horrific crime. Everyone is entitled to a retirement somewhere.

Actually, he was found GUILTY of obstruction of justice/destruction of evidence. And, being found NOT GUILTY of the other charges doesn't mean he didn't do it. I was at the trial.

========================================================================================================================================

Kay,
You are right. It does not mean he didn't do it with 100% certainty but it also does not mean he DID it.

He could have done something inappropriate with an 18 year older which is legal but shameful since he is her coach, and destroyed that evidence.

He could have done nothing inappropriate or illegal with a 16 year older and the destroyed records could have shown that. Maybe he just did not want the bad image of messing with an 18 year older which would have influenced the jury against him even if it was legal.

Basically, a jury found him not guilty and you are indirectly calling them insane.

Many juries found the Nicarico "killers" guilty REPEATEDLY but they were innocent. I guess you can say those juries are insane, too.

I think members of our society who are assigned jury should have a minor level of intelligence and independence. It seems most jurors these days are the brainless and unemployed members of society who go with the flow of the jury foreman while making $16 dollar a day.

Most times innocents are found guilty. What you are describing is unusal as you are alleging a guilty one was found innocent.

I would rahter see a few guilty ones be let loose than a whole bunch of innocents be jailed or put on Death Row.

In the end, we have to be 100% CERTAIN before we throw people in jail for 20 years or life. Don't forget Ms. Rogastrot, you can one day be falsely accused. It could happen to anyone. Some prosecutors will even indict their Mom instead of the occasional ham sandwich to make a name for themselves. Most public prosecutors are rejects working for 35k annually because no one in a private legal firm thought they were worth 70k. Imagine these prosecutors with graduate law degrees in DuPage and Will Counties are making less than Naperville POs and FFs who start at about 60k a year!!!

JFTR, I was not at the trial and do not know any of the parties involved. I just recall reading an article in the Sun about this case in the summer.

CIJ

PS. If you were at the trial every day, Kay, you must have been a friend or relative of the victim. You must have been emotionally involved with preconceived prejudicial feelings. Therefore, you would never be asked to judge this case as a jury person and you should not be judging this case as an involved party due to possible biases. It reminds me how the Nicarico Parents believed the 3 Hispanics killed their daughter for a quarter century. In the end the prosecutors brought undue shame on them and they left Naperviile. They were victims who were too emotionally involved and could not see the light. I feel bad for them as I feel bad for you. But in the end reason and logic has to overcome emotional and prejudicial feelings when determing ones innocence or guilt.

Actually, he was found GUILTY of obstruction of justice/destruction of evidence. And, being found NOT GUILTY of the other charges doesn't mean he didn't do it. I was at the trial. Any sane person would have found him guilty on all charges. Everyone but the defense was stunned at the verdict. My question is how could he be found guilty of obstruction of justice/destroying evidence and then not guilty of the other charges. Isn't that contradictory?

Every newspaper jumped and wrote all the "horror stories" when Gustavo Nicosia was acused. Yesterday (07-10-2009) he was found NOT GUILTY and I do not see anybody writing about it. I think you owe it to him!!! I am his friend and I know what he went through, so please let the justice win.