Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LordBaal]

/remembers the fuss about the Black Panthers...

Wakanda forever?

[Starver]

Kenosha trial update:

A jury of 12 has been randomly selected from the pool of 18 and is deliberating, and the judge sounds different today. Possibly sick.

That's how it's done in the US(/Wisconsin/Kenosha)? I thought I knew about the defender/prosecutor bargaining what mix of people would be on the jury (from OJ Simpson era), but still before the case was ever fully put to/argued against. This sounds like "we've made our cases, now who do we ask to think about what we said?", which doesn't sound proper.


(From a UK perspective, SFAICT in my own stint on Jury Duty the eventual twelve of us were initially sitting in the nury-suite, along with dozens of others similarly 'on call' and either enjoying or fretting about the enforced paid absence from work. Then we got called in to hear a case by some sort of next-on-the-master-list order (I think we'd all been attending for about a week, out of a planned four, at this stage, but I couldn't keep track, we weren't encouraged to introduce ourselves socially and I go face-blind for most recent acquaintences). After being formally asked if any of us knew anything/had other reason to be excused this sitting given some very basic details (no-one did? If anyone did, they were to be immediately swapped out before hearing more details), we were there for the duration, deliberation and verdict. Whether the counsels/lawyers/solicitors/whatever pre-approved our little group by whatever legal mysticism/omniscient Sorting Hat they had at hand, I don't really know.)


But 'tis Merika. Of course it's done differently.

[da_nang]

Jurors are screened by the defense and prosecution initially. Having more than twelve, I think, is just a precaution in case jurors are later dismissed so you still have at least twelve by the time the deliberations start.

[Starver]

I currently have no idea what we do if anyone 'drops out', forced or unforced, from our 12, but I think...

Actually, let's look it up. Yes, I was roughly right. There's a minimum number who must remain, before it gets legally awkward. I forgot about the card-shuffling, and I didn't know they could start by going out and asking passers by if necessary... They probably don't put that latter bit in the bumf they send you to prepare you for the prearranged attendance. (Which I might still have, but it was decades ago so I'm not sure about that.)

[da_nang]

Protests outside the courthouse. I sure hope the security is ready for it. Last thing we need is the defendant to get shot after a potential acquittal.

Let's also hope it doesn't affect the jury.

[lemon10]

Kenosha trial update:

A jury of 12 has been randomly selected from the pool of 18 and is deliberating, and the judge sounds different today. Possibly sick.

That's how it's done in the US(/Wisconsin/Kenosha)? I thought I knew about the defender/prosecutor bargaining what mix of people would be on the jury (from OJ Simpson era), but still before the case was ever fully put to/argued against. This sounds like "we've made our cases, now who do we ask to think about what we said?", which doesn't sound proper.

Nah, its random, which by definition isn't going to be manipulatable.
The funky part is that at the start of the trial jurors can be disqualified, nominally to prevent people that would never accept certain results or that have extreme crazy views (eg. someone that is 100% anti death penalty in a death penalty trial or someone that thinks human sacrifice is a moral obligation) from messing up the trial.
In practice though its frequently used to remove (all the) black jurors and other racial minorities by the prosecution despite said practice being illegal.

[da_nang]

Looks like we're getting at least two days of deliberation. Normal so far.

The defense has also filed an updated motion for mistrial with prejudice. They claim the prosecution deliberately withheld drone footage with a higher resolution.

EDIT: The judge has still not ruled on the motion, and the jury has asked if they get to view the videos in private or in the courtroom.

The defense has also noted that the manual of video software used to enhance the video states that enhancements are for investigative purposes only and are not fit for evidentiary purposes in court.

This jury is going to be so tainted.

EDIT2: Judge has read the motion. Bickering between prosecution and defense. Prosecution possibly caught in a lie: the file they sent to the defense over email had a different filesize, filename, and metadata compared to the file given over a thumbdrive much later. Judge feels like he wants to get an expert witness and maybe even put the prosecution under oath. Still no ruling on it.

Jesus, Judge, stop avoiding the elephant in the room.

EDIT3: Hell, the metadata shows the video provided to the defense was created 20 minutes after the creation of the video from the state crime lab.

[None]

Jesus, someone fucked up bad. If the digital forensics team in the crime lab are even slightly competent, they've got record of chain of custody and MD5 hashes on everything they touch, and at every step of touching it.

Although if it was initially withheld because the higher resolution was created via video enhancement and therefore not fit for evidentiary purpose (and therefore not being used AS evidence), it's not particularly surprising that the metadata is different if they were coerced into producing it? Maybe I'm not reading the situation carefully enough.

[da_nang]

Jurors are now alone in the courtroom and reviewing the drone footage.

Based on how this trial has gone, it will end in either full acquittal or at least a mistrial without prejudice due to prosecutorial fuckups. The judge definitely seems to be hinting towards waiting for the verdict before ruling on the motion.

EDIT: I'm worried who the holdouts are. Even if it's 11-1 in favor of acquittal, they might still try to compromise on a lesser charge just to put an end to their jury duty.

EDIT2: We're getting another day of deliberation, it seems.

[LordBaal]

Its true what pop culture states abour jury being acomodated in hotels and given food while deliberating? And theres is a time limit of sorts?

[da_nang]

They get lunch and such, but they only stay in hotels if they're sequestered (they haven't been).

Technically no time limit either, but the longer it goes on the greater the chance of a mistrial being declared. Especially if the prosecution asks for it, which usually happens when the jury is hung for days.

[delphonso]

Also, most jobs don't pay you for going to jury duty, so most people aren't keen to stay out of work for longer than necessary

[Frumple]

That's generally the big part, yeah. There's a nominal payment from the court, but it's very far from sustainable -- florida, ferex, is 15 bucks per day, which doubles to all of thirty after a few days. Well below minimum wage if they're in deliberation for very long, in other words. Slots roughly into the same kind of civic functioning as not having voting being a holiday, i.e. going out of its way to shit on anyone not wealthy enough to drop work for a while.

[LordBaal]

That's weird, as a civic duty you should be paid by your company, like a sick leave. Not saying a sick leave is civic duty. But both are things beyond your control so your work should still pay you. I guess public workers are free of this hook?

[WealthyRadish]

you should be paid by your company, like a sick leave.

Yeah, about that...