annalyzer
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2008
- Messages
- 526
- Reaction score
- 4
yep yep and another yep. when she said that's all i have my jaw hit the floor. not one question about the hotel stay, the trip, the clothing, the calls, nothing nada zilch.
Verdict Watch
- Thread starter Madeleine74
- Start date
- Status
yep yep and another yep. when she said that's all i have my jaw hit the floor. not one question about the hotel stay, the trip, the clothing, the calls, nothing nada zilch.
gracielee
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 4,095
- Reaction score
- 8
Like that big teddy bear detective in the cooper case. Was his name Daniels? Sorry, I am terrible with names.
That's why I didn't and still don't understand why those who post here and were of the cooper is innocent opinion, took any remarks of mine personally. I truly don't. I don't recall being nasty or personal to anyone. Just couldn't understand the criticizm of that case in particular, because nothing in it stood out as any different from hundreds of other first degree murder cases I've followed over the years. If anything, the JLY case seemed way too fast IMO. For such a brutal crime, involving totally circumstantial evidence, it went by like the Indy 500 IMO. The Scott Peterson case took months, and had similar circumstantial evidence. Yet I don't recall anybody thinking that case dragged along? Sorry, ramblings of a mad woman right now. :maddening::maddening:
gracielee
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 4,095
- Reaction score
- 8
Hopefully the GUILTY'S will hold strong and we get that second chance.
StJohn
Caribbean Paradise
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2011
- Messages
- 356
- Reaction score
- 330
I am seeing the same criticism lodged against Judge Perry in the Casey Anthony trial. Seems he promised some jurors they would be done by July 4th since some expressed they had firm family committments at that time. Ain't likely to happen.
Look don't blame JS. And no JG looks same as he ever did. There are unfortunately things that happen in a jury room that no one can predict. Remember, most here are seasoned in following trials and bring to the table a multitude of viewpoints. After all, they were selected because they did not know anything about this case before the trial. What may be bothering them may not create doubt for us.
borndem
Anglophile & registered demwit
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 19,121
- Reaction score
- 50,179
ITA - at least with this jury. Sounds like they were 6/6 from the get-go, and never budged.
Madeleine74
Knower of Things
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 11,556
- Reaction score
- 20,080
Cases are often won or lost the moment a jury is selected.
The Cooper jury was unusual in how quickly and closely they bonded. It worked great because when it came time to deliberate they all worked well together as a team, asked for the evidence they wanted immediately, and I got the feeling they weren't going to allow themselves to hang. They worked through whatever issues they had to get to a unanimous decision that each person could feel comfortable about.
The Cooper jury was unusual in how quickly and closely they bonded. It worked great because when it came time to deliberate they all worked well together as a team, asked for the evidence they wanted immediately, and I got the feeling they weren't going to allow themselves to hang. They worked through whatever issues they had to get to a unanimous decision that each person could feel comfortable about.
happy2binNC
Justice for Shaniya Davis!
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2011
- Messages
- 393
- Reaction score
- 0
Maybe all that time they spent in the jury room wasn't such a bad thing after all. :crazy:
I think it is better if each juror is independent and comes to their own conclusion. However, the one thing that was so compelling about JY's involvement was his silence for so long. However, jurors could not use that against him. Then he failed to show up for civil suit and schemed out of doing a deposition (as opposed to BC). So, the only time he spoke was at trial. Apparently, he was more believable to them than most of us.
Madeleine74
Knower of Things
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 11,556
- Reaction score
- 20,080
Courtroom activity.
Lunchtime I guess.
Lunchtime I guess.
gracielee
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 4,095
- Reaction score
- 8
We'll have to agree to disagree then. Judge Stephens made it clear from the get-go, this case would 'move along'. That's all well and good, but not to the detriment of all the witnesses and evidence being thoroughly introduced and examined, for how ever long and involved that takes. IMHO. This case had far too much circumstantial evidence to have moved this quickly, again, IMO. I've thought that right along. Where were certain witnesses, from JLY's other sister to other of Michelle's friends/family. How ever much and many it takes to come to the best understanding one can have of the case as a whole. Many of us wanted to know if anybody examined what Cas said on that tape. Many more questions I can't think of right now, as we are back in the court room.
fran
Former Member
Back in session. Jury indicated 1:30 for lunch. Judge is going to ask them for their progress. His intention is to let them deliberate until they reach a verdict.
Jury coming back in.
def closely watching jury come back in. IMO, watching their faces.
Judge asked for progress. can't hear answer......still at 6/6. He's not going to force them into making a decision. But he says they're obligated to TRY to come to a verdict. Asking if they're at an impasse. Not going to change.
Asking jury to go back and see if they agree with foreman, not reaching a verdict. he doesn't want to force them to stay if they aren't going to change.......discussing....................if they all believe no verdict, then he'll accept that and release them from further obligation in the matter. He thinks they're giving an honest attempt to reach a verdict.......jury back to jury room and asked to talk about if they can change their mind or not. If no, he'll let them go to lunch and release them. If they might be able to reach a verdict, he wants them to continue trying.....
Jury coming back in.
def closely watching jury come back in. IMO, watching their faces.
Judge asked for progress. can't hear answer......still at 6/6. He's not going to force them into making a decision. But he says they're obligated to TRY to come to a verdict. Asking if they're at an impasse. Not going to change.
Asking jury to go back and see if they agree with foreman, not reaching a verdict.
he doesn't want to force them to stay if they aren't going to change.......discussing....................if they all believe no verdict, then he'll accept that and release them from further obligation in the matter. He thinks they're giving an honest attempt to reach a verdict.......jury back to jury room and asked to talk about if they can change their mind or not. If no, he'll let them go to lunch and release them. If they might be able to reach a verdict, he wants them to continue trying.....
StJohn
Caribbean Paradise
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2011
- Messages
- 356
- Reaction score
- 330
Assuming they remain hung, he will probably decide based on the final vote. If majority vote for guilty, but a few holdouts, chances would be better to win on retrial. And he would probably ask Meredith & Linda Fisher about their feelings as well.
borndem
Anglophile & registered demwit
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 19,121
- Reaction score
- 50,179
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall of his office when he heard, "hung" and "6/6" - is there still a roof on the courthouse?? Whew!
- Status