Just for fun.

"Annette Gordon-Reed, a law professor, has suggested in her various books that she thinks she could convict 
Jefferson in a court of law."

If "A. G-R" were trying TJ in today's court, it would be indeed might be a cakewalk as she would only have to show 
by "a preponderance of the evidence" to win a civil judgment in favor of her "plaintiff" - assuming the trial is 
about trying to establish a liaison not the commission of an unlawful act.

If "A. G-R" were trying TJ in a criminal court of his times, I suspect she would fail to convince a jury "beyond a 
resonable doubt, not every doubt, but a reasonable doubt" and the supposed "victim's" complaint would probably 
fail.

So there's the "muddle". Is it the goal to convict for a specific act on or about in the country of the 
Commonwealth or to establish a relationship for purposes of ascertaining what might have been?

From the post I have read, it's about the latter.

How's that for something for everybody?

 

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html