Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It seems the Idaho process is designed to help the jury understand it is the murderer who sent himself to death row not the jury who simply could not find any reason to intervene and spare his life.I'm not, of course, but the ID process leaves the jurors emotions (about the DP) entirely out of the equation, and instead focuses them on deciding the merits of underlying reasons for which (in this case) there was no doubt whatsoever imo. And I think you and all the others here would agree.
There were 6 questions in all, the following x 3
1 Was this murder of ____ committed for remuneration of some kind? [He clearly did each to obtain sex and money. Easy to say yes. Obvious.]
... If yes, were the mitigating factors sufficient to make the DP unjust? [No. There were no mitigating factors to consider.]
2 Was this murder of ____ committed in a heinous, extreme, cruel way of some kind? [Each murder fit that description too.]
... If yes, were the mitigating factors sufficient to make the DP unjust? [No. There were no mitigating factors to consider.]
All were clearly yes, and not offset by any mitigating factor. And that was all the jury had to figure out. None of the jurors had to wrestle with whether they like the DP or not, but rather with those 2 questions for each murder.
It’s how he was yesterday when the judge announced no mitigating presentation too.That's how CD was facing for most of the hearing, just looking at the wall.
Yes, looks like such disconnect between these twoAnd I still think JP is ticked at CD…
It’s how he was yesterday when the judge announced no mitigating presentation too.
I checked and he stood up in the beginning, so it might be him showing disrespect on purpose at the very end.Did CD refuse to stand for the jury or was there something preventing it?
Hard for me to tell with the different camera angles but I thought he was facing the judge and clerk while she read.The way he looks at the wall, it's like saying he doesn't accept the court's authority. And maybe think he's going to be saved still, like escape through a portal.
I'm guessing he didn't try to mitigate because it would mean admitting he did it and would be validating the process.
And no address by the judge. That part was a little disappointing. It would be interesting to compare his opinion to that he gave at Lori's trial.No polling of individual jurors for the findings of guilty.
No presentation of mitigating factors before the deliberations relevant to the DP.
No allocution before the deliberations relevant to the DP.
No polling of individual jurors for the findings relevant to the DP.
JP seemed to have surrendered after giving it his all through the point of ending his closing statement. Why?