What is the difference ?
The judge told the accused, they had no case to answer and was freed. Does that mean Kern did nothing wrong ?
Had Kern been found not guilty, would that have not meant the evidence presented was not enough to prove guilt.
Does that mean Kern is innocent ?
Filed under: Corruption |
 | Anonymous on The 1976 State of Public Emerg… |
 | jay on The JLP should commission audi… |
| Chucks on George Wright should hold off… |
| jay on Jamaica murder statistics 1970… |
| Chucks on Jamaica murder statistics 1970… |
 | Sam on Nightmare in opposition and wo… |
| jay on Projected Election Results for… |
| Chucks on Projected Election Results for… |
| jay on Projected Election Results for… |
| Chucks on Projected Election Results for… |
| jay on Projected Election Results for… |
| Chucks on Projected Election Results for… |
Warren's Blog 
Kern Spencer and his baby mother was basically set free by the Judge. The was more than enough evidence to convict both, but the judge basically wanted to send a message to the DPP for her defiance. IMHO, the DPP did not play her hand correctly and should not be hitting heads with the Judge. Motion denied or no case to answer to….it is that simple!
Kern Spencer was set free to spite the DPP who had the audacity to request the the SRM recuse herself. She did it to show the DPP who the boss is. The DPP would have looked good if the case had gone to trial and the SRM could not allow that to happen.