Mistrial declared in murder case

Mistrial declared in murder case

There are 20 comments on the The Item story from Apr 23, 2008, titled Mistrial declared in murder case. In it, The Item reports that:

“Both families wanted closure. Anytime a person accused of a crime comes out of court without a guilty verdict, the defendant feels a great sense of relief.”

Jury unable to reach verdict in trial of man accused in death of Shelton Sanders The murder trial of Mark Richardson, accused of killing Rembert's Shelton Sanders, son of former Sumter magistrate, William ... via The Item

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Item.

Liz

AOL

#1 Jul 1, 2008
Is there going to be a retrial?
sandbag

Crescent City, CA

#3 Jul 2, 2008
If it dont fit you cant convict
Nothing links mark richardson to this crime.
So if the state retries my guess they will NOT get a conviction.
There is ample reasonable doubt thats why the jury hung,
Jodie

Lawrenceville, GA

#4 Jul 3, 2008
Watching this now on In Session (Court TV) I didn't realize that the trial was over. I am satisfied at the outcome though. No body, no blood, no forensics, no motive for this man wanting to kill his friend, how did this case ever get inside the court room? Is this what we have become in this country? We allow law enforcement and prosecutors to take someone to court for murder on their gut feeling with no evidence to support it???
No wonder we have so many wrongful convictions. Thank God the jury used their brains in this one.
Deborah

Marietta, GA

#5 Jul 3, 2008
Liz wrote:
Is there going to be a retrial?
I don't know if Richardson commited the murder or not but I am sure there wasn't enough evidence to prove he did. Without new evidence I don't see a retrial but....ya never know.
Pat

United States

#6 Jul 3, 2008
I can also understand why this man wasn't convicted. I couldn't have convicted him on the evidence either. But I truly believe he's guilty of the murder and believe it's scary to know that a murderer is running free.
cameron

Mesquite, NV

#7 Jul 3, 2008
am I the only one? I think this judicial system is screwed up? how does anyone even get arrested for murder without somekind of evidence? there isn't anything! I waited for something and was very dissapointed, this should not be allowed as a legal act on behalf of the State! I can't believe this man had to hire an attorney and face such a horrible crime. not to mention all of the negative attention to his life. I think he should sue the cops for being so stupid. And the Attorney for the State should be fired! What a dumbass!
Bertha

San Francisco, CA

#8 Jul 3, 2008
There was no evidence presented to prove that Richardson committed this crime. However, I do understand how the jury reached its decision. With what I saw, I could not have convicted Richardson.

Pittsburg, CA.
Bertha

San Francisco, CA

#9 Jul 3, 2008
Liz wrote:
Is there going to be a retrial?
I think the state will be wasting money if they retried Richard with the same circumstantial evidence that they presented.
lynn

Miami, FL

#10 Jul 3, 2008
I think he killed the man but you cannot convict on the evidence they had. He was the last person to see the victim and there were gun shots heard (back firing from a car?) I don't know. I really don't understand what made them decide to take this to trial. I guess they figured they'd never find any more evidence and went with it. They probably knew they had a slim chance of convicting him but they must have decided to try it anyway. They probably thought this was the best they had. Trials cost so much money and I doubt they will re try this one. That's just my guess.
Kellie

San Antonio, TX

#11 Jul 3, 2008
The only reason this case saw the inside of a courtroom is because Shelton Sander's father is a former magistrate, and his colleagues gave him special consideration by taking the case to trial with no direct evidence, and weak circumstantial evidence. Unfortunately, all they did was weaken the respect/faith of the community for local law enforcement and prosecutor's office. The State's case raised nothing but reasonable doubt, so how the jury came back hung is bewildering. I think the jury took the easy way out because they didn't want to be the ones setting Richardson free w/o the possibility of being retried due to double jeopardy, not to mention disappointing Sander's family and friends.
izzie

Normantown, WV

#12 Jul 4, 2008
The neighbors heard the shots; Richardson had pulled a gun on his friends in the past; Richardson was the last to see the victim alive; Richardson spoke disrespectfully and used vulgarity to the victim's father. This to me constitutes guilt and I would have voted that way.
Viking Knight

Glendale, CA

#13 Jul 7, 2008
So Sad.
marvin

Marrero, LA

#14 Jul 7, 2008
i did not see a guilty verdict from the start.but i can see mr.richardson being a prime suspect

new orleans, la
KATHY GEORGIA

United States

#15 Jul 8, 2008
Pat wrote:
I can also understand why this man wasn't convicted. I couldn't have convicted him on the evidence either. But I truly believe he's guilty of the murder and believe it's scary to know that a murderer is running free.
I COULD NOT AGREE MORE I THINK HE KILLED HIM. TRULY SCARY!!!!!
KATHY

United States

#16 Jul 8, 2008
izzie wrote:
The neighbors heard the shots; Richardson had pulled a gun on his friends in the past; Richardson was the last to see the victim alive; Richardson spoke disrespectfully and used vulgarity to the victim's father. This to me constitutes guilt and I would have voted that way.
I agree he even act guilty.
Jodie

Lawrenceville, GA

#17 Jul 9, 2008
Can someone please explain exactly what "acting guilty" means? Does it fall somewhere close to "not grieving properly" or "looking guilty" or "fake tears" etc...etc...etc...?
We have to stop this deciding someone is guilty just because of the way they act. None of us are the same; we all act differently in different situations. If evidence along with their actions adds up to guilt then by all means, go with it but when you have no evidence, give them the benefit of doubt until you do have evidence.
Whatwereyousmoki ng

Lytle Creek, CA

#18 Jul 9, 2008
Pat wrote:
I can also understand why this man wasn't convicted. I couldn't have convicted him on the evidence either. But I truly believe he's guilty of the murder and believe it's scary to know that a murderer is running free.
You think guilty and no evidence to support it? You have serious problems with recognizing fact from fantasy!!!!
You state he is guilty and provide not one iota of evidence to support your opinion, conclusion or anything else.
This was simply a case where Daddy had influence and wanted to hand someone for a suspected murder.
The family was something else ... CELEBRATING the son's birthday when when they thought he was dead!!! A memorial service would have been credible but to be celebrating a joyous occasion when they thought he was dead is just plain sick. Not one person who remembers a person on the day of their birth CELEBRATES it will happiness and partying when the person is deceased. Something is seriously wrong with that family. No wonder the father is of the bench.
unknown

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#19 Jul 11, 2008
All the signs of a guilty man was there, the courts does not work that way. The guy had threaten two other friends with a gun, and he was paranoid. That in itself is a deadly combination. Shelton was missing on the 19th, they didn't inspect his trailer until the 29th, more than enough time to get rid of a body. For all you people out there who seriously believe because there isn't a body he's not guilty. I looked it up on the internet, there are quite a few cases where people are found guilty and the body was never found. Shelton mother is like me, I have four children and I check on them all the time, if I didn't here from them I would know something is wrong.He called and said he was on his way home, that's they last call he made to his family. A mother knows her child. I think this guy was guilty, but there wasn't enough evidence to convict him. He was tripping and thinking everyone was out to get him, he said he was going to get them before they got him. Unfortunately, gut instinct is not the law of the courts, facts are, and there just wasn't enough facts.
marvin

Houma, LA

#20 Jul 14, 2008
The state must first prove that there was a murder.I don't think they did.A missing body does not prove this person has been murdered.Missing persons have been known to resurface.But i do think Mr. may not be alive.But that a long way from proof Mr.Richardson is guilty of murder.

New Oleans,La
Debbie Canter

Norwich, OH

#21 Jul 20, 2008
Iam so surprised at somethings that were not
examined. For instance on one day they interviewed him for several hours and got absolutely nothing on paper about that interview..WHY...because they could not coerce him into saying anything they wanted him to say...Police are very bad anymore about leading people and talking them for so long in the interigation room that they will eventualy say anything to get out and leave.

Also.. Why was this prostitute not found and a witness for Richardson about where he was that night and who he was with..It would eliviate alot of problems...
I also did not like that the warrant for his arrest because it says he was shot and killed...They found a gun and a knife and some other things at the house...To put in an arrest warrant that he was shot with absolutley no proof is an assumption that should not have been made!!!! Also they should have looked into the cell tower issue of his phone call because how far does that cellphone tower reach..Coul;d he have been even 20 miles from there and his cellphone might have still bounced of that cellphone tower... How close did he need to be to be bounced off that cellphone tower????

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Rembert Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Georgia Family Settles Autism Suit (Mar '08) 9 hr VACCINES CAUSE AU... 119
News SCANA tells regulators: Cutting power bills wou... 10 hr Stan 1
News Resident runs throughout Aiken County for ALS a... (Aug '15) Tue Chelsea 112
Atheism is a religion that worships mankind. Dec 11 tHEmAN1111 1
News Some see echoes of '68 court case in wedding ca... Dec 3 Pence of Tides 2
News More Than Lower Rates and Refunds in Proposed E... Dec 3 stan 1
News Rembert woman arrested for murder (Oct '14) Jul '15 eightballjzay 4

Rembert Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Rembert Mortgages