#jury trial

[llithiaskyla]

There is a reason why you cannot serve on a jury if you have any personal relations to anything happening in the case. This judge is not going to be impartial in the slightest and I'm wishing Luigi and his lawyer luck. He needs it 😕🙏

[notlemoncello]

I’m so fucking mad are you kidding me

“He’s screaming at people”

“He wasn’t even insured by UnitedHealth Care”

“Why didn’t he protest instead of shooting someone”

Why is the news pretending to be shocked at what is happening. America is a capitalist country, it will get away with as much as it can until there’s push back from the people affected. This is push back. Protests didn’t work, asking nicely didn’t work, pleading, begging, crying didn’t work.

What else can people do to make sure they are heard?

The federal government adding on charges after the state government already had charges is bullshit and dogpiling at best, the possibility of the death penalty on the federal level being on the table is even more bullshit. Personally I don’t give a shit what you did, no one should get the death penalty.

The government should not decide whose lives deserve to end.

Outside of that is genuinely costs more money for the government to kill someone than keep them in prison for life. Where the hell is “we need to decrease the National Debt” thinking now??

All of this truly shows how much the United States Government cares about the lives of CEOs, business, and corporations more that the lives of American Citizens.

If you are going to call me a dog then don’t be surprised if I bite like one.

[tilbageidanmark]

A list of cognitive biases

[somethingusefulfromflorida]

Trump has so many charges against him that he's almost certainly going to be convicted of something. Not everything, probably not even a majority, but something. He knows he won't get unanimous acquittals across the board, so his only hope will be to slip loyalists onto some of the juries to hang them. A mistrial means months or years of delays as prosecution works each case through the system all over again.

In New York, he'd be retried over and over until a unanimous verdict is reached, guilty or not guilty, however long that takes, and every state level Republican candidate from now on will campaign on promises to drop the charges or pardon him or help him in some way, shape, or form.

In Georgia (he hasn't been indicted yet, but it's coming), he's going to be pardoned almost immediately. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets pardoned before it even goes to trial. Yeah, the governor refused to find 11,000 votes for him, but he's still a Republican and trump is still the leader of his party. If he didn't pardon trump, he would be crucified by his voters and shamed out of office, and his successor would pardon him instead. If he stood his ground and couldn't be bullied into resigning, then just as in New York every Republican candidate would run on the pardon promise platform. Trump will NEVER face justice in Georgia.

In the federal case in Florida, a mistrial means the judge, a trump appointee, could drop the charges and prevent the DOJ from retrying it. Best case scenario, it would get delayed into 2025 or 2026 and a different judge in the southern district of Florida will be randomly assigned to it, but that's assuming Biden wins re-election in 2024. If trump wins, he'd immediately pardon himself, or invoke the 25th to have his loyalist VP pardon him to avoid a Supreme Court decision on a self-pardon's validity. If Biden wins, the 2028 Republican candidates will all run on promises to pardon him, so he'll be out of prison the second the White House goes red. I don't trust Democrats to hold the line long enough for him to die in prison.

The federal case in Washington, DC looks open and shut, the best chance for a conviction. Trump only has four appointees in that district, so the odds of him getting off on a retrial in case of a hung jury are 4 in 13, 30.77% (4/15, 26.67% if Biden can fill the two remaining vacancies). Again, all this does is kick the can down the road until 2025 or 2026. He will walk free whenever the Republicans take back power.

The only way donald trump faces long term consequences for his crimes is if New York stays solid blue for the rest of his life, something like the next 15 or 20 years. The federal charges will disappear the second one of his allies gets elected president; I don't think the party would nominate him for a fourth time in 2028 if he loses 2024 for them, so it's looking like it's gonna be ron desantis vs Kamala Harris (God help us all). Then again, who knows? A lot can happen in the next 5 years, so maybe some nobody will be frontrunner by then and desantis will have slinked away into post-gubernatorial obscurity like Jeb and Charlie Crist. Whoever trump endorses will be the nominee, so whoever strokes his ego the hardest will have hometeam advantage. My money says it'll be some blonde woman or a lightskinned black guy for diversity points (whoever it is, they'll be even farther right than trump himself)

[remembertheplunge]

What are your 3 words for 2023

Grinder poll at 3am 12/14/2017

What are your 3 words for 2017?

I replied:

Harsh

Beautiful ]

Extreme 

In 2017, I got very involved with the homeless, letting several of them live for brief times in my house and passing out bags of food in over 10 cities.

I wrote the 2017 "3 words" in the margin  of the December 14 page of the book “A Year with Hafiz”.

As the years passed I wrote 3 word for other years in the margin on that page as follows:

2019.  12/14/2019

Revealing 

Answered

Harvest

In 2019 my death penalty client Rigo Gomez entered a felony plea, was released in October to rehab  and then went to work for Community Resource Initiative, a mitigation team that assists on some of my cases, including Rigo’s.

2021

12/14/2021

Journals

Stockton 

Gym

By 2021, I had begun work on the book from my journals and started work as a criminal defense attorney in Stockton.

I hit the gym most days

2022

12/14/2022

Open

Water

Swim

In July 2022 I began swimming in the ocean in Aquatic Park in San Fransisco. In September 2022 I did my first swim from just off Alcatraz island to the San Fransisco Yacht Harbor. Rigo Gomez did the swim with me.

Swimming in the ocean is known as open water swimming.

2023

12/15/2023

Shock

Blog 

Victory

In 2023, my Sister Zoe died in May. I am still in shock.

My Tumblr Blog began on February 5, 2023

I got a not guilty  victory in a Felony Jury Trial on November 3, 2023

Note:

Grinder is a Gay Dating app.

[jhsharman]

we, the jury

Trial date delays and all, it almost would make sense to keep it at September even as the cover date for a later printing is January -- meaning a November release. The date September 10 is a bit jarring, though. The release for the second version here was cover November, release September, which is odd -- I would think they would have decided on an earlier month.

Some important deviations from "solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God". They have rolled out this narration a number of times over the decades -- some covers, some dream sequences, some whole stories, stories that are dream sequences. And I don't know if Al Hartley ever ran with this one, but I can be assured if he did Jughead's is not the oath given in Hartley's story. On the main part of this oath -- it is a funny change, but I think the word balloon is at its size limit.

[if-you-fan-a-fire]

“FOR THIRD TIME VINKLE JURY HAS DISAGREED,” Kingston Whig-Standard. February 23, 1933. Page 2. ---- Case to Be Called to the Attention of the Attorney-General of Ontario ---- For the third time in five month, a jury in Supreme Court has been unable to agree on a verdict of guilty or not guilty, in the case of Hess Vinkle, of the Township of Olden, charged with setting fire to Ross McGinnis’ barn. Yesterday evening after deliberating for more than seven hours, the jury found that they could not agree on a verdict and accordingly were discharged by Justice Raney, the case being put over til the next court; it will also be brought to the attention of the Attorney-General. Sir Alfred Morine acted for the Crown and A. E. Day represented Vinkle. 

The jury in the case retired shortly after eleven o'clock on Wednesday morning and at four o'clock returned with the announcement that they could not agree on a verdict.

"You have, of course," said Justice Raney, "heard of the two previous disagreements. I wish that you would try and reach a verdict and if I send you back I wonder if you can come to an agreement?"

“Well, your Lordship," said W. M. Campbell, foreman, "we can only try.” 

Whereupon the jury again retired and remained locked up for two hours more. At the end of that time they returned and Mr. Campbell announced that the jurymen were all unable to reach an agreement.

"I wonder if I sent you back there with your suppers, if you could finally agree," asked Justice Raney.

“I don't think there is any chance at all," replied Mr. Campbell. 

"Are you sure you are not following precedent, as the lawyers do?” 

"No" replied Mr. Campbell, "we have been deliberating most thoroughly and there seems hardly a chance at all of an agreement.” 

Justice Raney then said that be would discharge the jury and would traverse the case to the next court at the same time bringing the matter to the attention of the Attorney-General.

“What did you say, Mr. Day?" asked Justice Raney.

“I merely said thank you, my Lord," replied Mr. Day. "Don't thank me," remarked Justice Raney. 

Vinkle appeared in Supreme Court in September last on the same charge and the jury disagreed, while again December the jury failed to come to a decision.

[captainfanoftheceiling]

If you are in jury selection with someone like this: do not react. They are not going to be selected, but the prosecutors are watching everyone else for their reactions. Don't clap, laugh, or show support. Then get on the jury and vote either not guilty or nullification.

[millarlawfirm]

Accident reconstruction experts, medical doctors, automotive repair experts—discover how testimony from these and other experts can help strengthen your Georgia accident case.

[confusedguytoo]

thinking about it: I think juries exist for the express purpose of jury nullification

I mean what's more likely? Someone decided that a group of people in some way similar to you are going to be able to properly play detective to decide if you're actually the person that did a crime based on what they've been told? Or that a group of people like you can decide whether you deserve to be punished for that?

[robertbrancatelli]

"Juror #2," Movie Review

by George Young Cynicism. Not the finest of human traits. However, a manageable dose of it helps when undertaking reviews of creative product. Symphony concertos. Broadway plays. Jazz performances. Books. Television. Anything with the influence of the right brain is the subject of scrutiny, subjectivity, and scorn. Professional and amateur movie and TV critics are known to be anything but…

[disasterhimbo]

[ID: a tweet by i’m soli (@SoliSolstice) dated 19 February 2024 that says, “12 angry men is so cool. i wish convincing people with reasonable evidence and logical arguments was real.” End ID.]

[ulkaralakbarova]

In small-town Texas, affable and popular mortician Bernie Tiede strikes up a friendship with Marjorie Nugent, a wealthy widow well known for her sour attitude. When she becomes controlling and abusive, Bernie goes to great lengths to remove himself from her grasp. Credits: TheMovieDb. Film Cast: Bernie Tiede: Jack Black Marjorie Nugent: Shirley MacLaine Danny Buck Davidson: Matthew McConaughey Scrappy Holmes: Brady Coleman Lloyd Hornbuckle: Richard Robichaux Don Leggett: Rick Dial Sheriff Huckabee: Brandon Smith Rev. Woodard: Larry Jack Dotson Molly: Merrilee McCommas Carl: Mathew Greer Townsperson: Marjorie Dome Townsperson: Tim Cariker Townsperson: Fern Luker Townsperson: Jack Payne Townsperson: Sonny Carl Davis Townsperson: Chris Humphrey Mourner: Jesse Lucio Townsperson: Ann Reeves Townsperson: Kay Epperson Townsperson: Ira Bounds Townsperson: James Baker Townsperson: Kay McConaughey Townsperson: Kristi Youngblood Townsperson: Kenny Brevard Townsperson: Margaret Bowman Townsperson: Mollie Fuller Townsperson: Tanja Givens Townsperson: Glenda Jones Townsperson: Travis Blevins Townsperson: Sylvia Froman Townsperson: Martha Long Townsperson: Jo Perkins Townsperson: Reba Tarjick Townsperson: Dale Dudley Townsperson: James Wilson Townsperson: Teresa Edwards Townsperson: Billy Vaticalos Townsperson: Rob Anthony Larry Brumley: Tommy G. Kendrick Townsperson: Pam McDonald Townsperson: Kathy Gollmitzer Townsperson: Cozette McNeely Professor Fleming: Richard Andrew Jones Friend of Deceased: Charles Bailey Mrs. Pebworth: Suzi McLaughlin Mr. Estes: Grant James Mrs. Estes: Juli Erickson Dwayne Nugent: J.D. Young Dwayne Jr.: Charlie m Stewart Lewie: Joe Stevens Esmerelda: Raquel Gavia Church Goer: Amparo García Oil Worker: Toby Metcalf Chainsaw Artist: Doug Moreland Pianist: Edward Ji Guys & Dolls Performer: Jill Blackwood Mel: David Blackwell Kevin: Gabriel Luna Photographer: Deana Newcomb Assistant Director: David Steakley Bank Manager: Peter Harrell Jr. Deputy Sheriff: Joe Leroy Reynolds Truck Driver: Christian Stokes Generator Operator: John Hornbuckle Sheriff’s Deputy #2: Wray Crawford Café Waitress: Margaret Hoard IRS Agent: Charles Allen Eskew TV Reporter: Quita Culpepper Cashier: Mona Lee Fultz Judge: Jerry Biggs Lead Juror: Robert Works Community Theater Group: Chris Barfield Community Theater Group: Taylor Bryant Community Theater Group: Colin Bevis Community Theater Group: Jacqui Bloom Community Theater Group: Joshua Denning Community Theater Group: Ellie Edwards Community Theater Group: Alaina Flores Community Theater Group: Jennifer Foster Community Theater Group: Leslie Hethcox Community Theater Group: Jordan Hill Community Theater Group: Berkley Jones Community Theater Group: Trevor McGinnis Community Theater Group: Mika Odom Community Theater Group: Chell Parkins Community Theater Group: David Ponton Community Theater Group: Gray Randolph Community Theater Group: Rachel Hull-Ryde Community Theater Group: Ian Saunders Community Theater Group: Madelyn Shaffer Community Theater Group: Larissa Slota Community Theater Group: Daniel Rae Srivastava Community Theater Group: Ellen Stader Community Theater Group: Lara Wright Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Betty Andrews Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Marcia Bailey Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Umpy Bechtol Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Nita Bouldin Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Nellie Hickerson Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Jeanette Kloppe Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Geraldine Miller Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Sharon Rigsbee Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Debbie Shaw Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Flo Weiershausen Mrs. Senior Carthage Pageant Contestant: Gina Wooten Juror: Gary Askins Juror: Ben Bachelder Juror: Meredith Beal Juror: Stacey Bruck Juror: Michelle Briscoe Juror: Lesa Brooks Juror: Gayla Bruce Juror: Brenda Bunton Juror: Kristi Copeland Juror: Jeff Davis Juror: Orion Gallagher Juror: Kenneth C. Liverman Juror: Linda Rudwick Juror: Mary Stifflemir...

[masterofd1saster]

J. Gorsuch is right! Jury trial means 12 jurors.

= Before the conquest, we can discover the clearest vestiges of a jury qualified by an oath, and consisting of twelve men. The most ancient, says Selden, are to be found in a law of King Ethelred. The Works of the Honourable James Wilson. (1804). Vol II.

= "juries in criminal cases consisted of twelve in the time of Alfred; and the number twelve is so often mentioned in the Saxon laws" John Reeves's History of the English Law, from the Time of the Romans to the End of the Reign of Elizabeth. (1869).

= Welsh juries were composed of 12 men in 725. Forsyth, W. (1875). History of Trial by Jury. New York. Cockcroft & Co

Sadly, SCt refused to consider Cunningham v. Florida, 23-5171 . J. Gorsuch chastised his peers:

“For almost all of this Nation’s history and centuries before that, the right to trial by jury for serious criminal offenses meant the right to a trial before 12 members of the community.” Khorrami v. Arizona, 598 U. S. , (2022) (GORSUCH, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari) (slip op., at 9). Acutely concerned with individuals and their liberty, the framers of our Constitution sought to preserve this right for future generations. See id., at – (slip op., at 2–3); Art. III, §2, cl. 3; Amdt. 6. Yet today, a small number of States refuse to honor its promise. Consider this case: A Florida court sent Natoya Cunningham to prison for eight years on the say of just six people.*** We had understood “the jury referred to in the original Constitution and in the Sixth Amendment is a jury constituted, as it was at common law, of twelve persons.”*** Pointing to academic studies, Williams tepidly predicted that 6-member panels would “probably” deliberate just as carefully as 12-member juries. 399 U. S., at 100–102. But almost before the ink could dry on the Court’s opinion, the social science studies on which it relied came under scrutiny. See, e.g., H. Zeisel, . . . And Then There Were None: The Diminution of the Federal Jury, 38 U. Chi. L. Rev. 710, 713–715 (1971). Soon, the Court was forced to acknowledge “empirical data” suggesting that, in fact, “smaller juries are less likely to foster effective group deliberation” and may not produce as reliable or accurate decisions as larger ones. Ballew v. Georgia, 435 U. S. 223, 232–235 (1978) (plurality opinion). All in all, Williams was an embarrassing mistake—“wrong the day it was decided.” Khorrami, 598 U. S., at _ (slip op., at 1).***

[smstrouse]

The Nightmare of Jury Duty Redux

Much has been written, discussed, and debated about jury selection for the New York trial of He Who Shall Not Be Named. Things have died down a bit since the actual trial began this week, but I’m still feeling empathy for those eighteen brave souls. In 2011, I posted “When the Jury is Judged” in the aftermath of the Casey Anthony trial. In 2013, I posted “The Nightmare of Jury Duty” after the…

[remembertheplunge]

7 minute verdict

8/29/1989. Friday. Should be, anyway. I’ve lived a week in these last two days.

It’s a really windy Tuesday. Thought I saw the wind blowing the stars around like sparks flying up from a fire.

The day of the 7 minute verdict.

7 minutes to give a guy 7 years.

One year per minute.

How do I feel?

Humiliated and happy.

Glad I ain’t got a death grip on it.

I poured my soul into the trial but managed to hang loose, too.

And, that’s good.

And, to have all of that work and lust 

Crash down in 7 minutes.

Amazing.

In a way, a blessing. No lingering torture (waiting for a verdict).

I think “Am I losing my touch?”

God, 7 minutes.

A blind dog could have probably kept them out 8.

Obviously my whole participation in that trial was moot.

The foreman was an old coot.

He’s been on 2 jurys before.

Next time “he’s” out. (A potential juror like him)

The 2 girls who didn’t like tattoos (client must have had visible tattoos)

Next time “out”.

They were honest.

I should have listened

It does hurt in such a way that I must keep silent myself.

Nice hiding tucked away at Mom and Dad’s tonight.

End of entry

Note:

I was a deputy public defender in Stanislaus County when I lost that jury trial. I had completely forgotten that trial. If I hadn't recorded the trial experience, it would have been lost forever.

I'm in a jury trial in Stockton now. I just completed another November 3rd, 2023. That one resulted in a not guilty verdict as to car jacking and robbery with a gun. Completely different post trial experience than i had in the 1989 case above.. I will blog that trial experience as soon as the client's cases are finished. She had one other active case other than the one that resulted in the jury trial.