While the entire trial may have been televised, I doubt most of the commenters here watched the entire thing and then debated it for 16 hours with a group of 5 peers who had also sat through the entire trial.

I'm saying the majority of people arguing will have unlikely watched the entire trial from start to finish, and even those that did will likely have already had an opinion from before the trial started

But what is the point? Having had an opinion before the trial started doesn't preclude someone from talking about it today. Not having watched the trial from start to finish doesn't either. You're just saying "be civil"? Thanks, that's already in the site guidelines though.

>But what is the point? Having had an opinion before the trial started doesn't preclude someone from talking about it today.

I'm not saying people shouldn't discuss it, I'm saying the discussion should be focused on the trial, the events, and the facts instead of people just blowing up with emotion.