Bla bla two faced talk of judge Stevens

(Trial 690) Judge Stevens: "Inferences are simply conclusions drawn from other proven facts. It must be logical and rational. It must never be speculation or guess work. If in relation to any aspect of the case, the evidence would support two conclusions of similar weight, then to choose between them would be to guess and you should not do that". It turned out that the jury did exactly what instructed not to do, but due to my lawyers fault more than their own. (Although my benefit of the doubt runs thin when you read all the defence evidence that was actually presented in court by crown and defence experts alike. It would seem a lot of coin tossing still went on). And this is exactly what Judge Stevens did deliberately. The irony thing again! So what can you ‘infer’ given all the factual evidence as it really is? I know first hand now, how easily our justice system puts innocent people in prison. It makes me thankful I am guilty of assault, as I can commit much easier to trying to make the most of this. I don’t have to waste energy beating at stone walls designed to maintain convictions to save face, come hell or high water. I can see how frustrated they must get at lack of evidence to convict child abusers. I can see the majority of the time they get it correct. I can make excuses for all they did wrong in order to get me convicted, by putting it down to frustration and them being so intuitive they believed I was guilty. However, I can not accept the truth of what actually happened, not being accepted. I owe Melissa, her family, other children of New Zealand and God, that much at least.