My guess is you posted this on the wrong post.

Well if they are just standing around and not actually shooting people they are still “participating” but aren’t doing anything wrong

Ah fair enough. Thank you for the information

They clearly gave us the biggest hint in 2000

I don’t agree with this practice of planned obsolescence, but aren’t cars already their own planned obsolescence? You have to keep giving it fuel, so in terms of the analogy, wouldn’t the company just stop selling fuel? You still have the parts, they just no longer function

Yes I’m aware that car manufacturers don’t sell the fuel, which causes a problem with my analogy, but I can’t see a perfect analogy for this case.

I have 2 days worth of food in my home. 4 days worth of lunch. When the 2 days of food runs out, I buy more on my way home. Same goes for when the lunch runs out. Meaning if I’m caught at a bad time, I’ll have 0 food

I agree wholeheartedly. Even if the state doesn’t allow for a retrial, her conviction should be removed. Like you said it only matters ethically

It absolutely should matter if she did the deed, as that makes her a murderer, but I will concede that if they used corrupt means to convict her it does invalidate the whole process.

There is a very fine balance to be struck here that I don’t think I can do justice.