_____________________________________________________________
Now from what The Foreman has said, here are the points that are contentious.
1. The Foreman stated that he did not take into account Travis's family's impact statements, that they didn't mean anything to him, but Jodi's allocution did.
2. When he first saw the defendant, he could not see her as a murderer, even though she had already admitted she killed Travis. Then he never shared this bias with the judge so he could be removed.
3. He said that they agreed to not change their votes and to not deliberate about the case. So what were they doing in the jury room all that time? Gossiping? What? Judge told them to WORK on it, yet it appears he had no intention of getting the jury to work on it.
4. The Foreman seems seriously of low-key intellect, as he now makes statements that show he did not understand the jury instructions at all. He thought that if he gave the judge a hung jury, that Jodi would automatically be given LIFE. He had no idea there would be a mistrial and a potential sentencing retrial. Everyone else seems to know about this, though.
5. After the trial, he states that he wants to "reach out to Jodi." Now there really is no fool like an old fool
_________________________________________________________________
On the #3 and #4 points in this blog:
How can the jurors NOT deliberate and they all agreed to this??? Makes my mind spin out of control :scared:.
What were they all thinking??
Is this what the foreman said? I haven't seen all the interview- just what HLN has shown.
And didn't the judge say she and the lawyers would answer any questions they had about how to deliberate and what the verdict- death or life would mean??? REALLY. :banghead:
Makes my head spin :scared: :scared: :stormingmad:
