Vern
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2017
- Messages
- 2,790
- Reaction score
- 27,710
No, no it's not. The prosecution aren't the ones out there suggesting that they are going to leak potential juror pool names out in advance to a bunch of internet sleuths so that those sleuths can attempt to dig up dirt on them to potentially influence the verdict. And, discussing doing ths with member(s) of the public albeit in a private chat amongst other platform means? There's a clear violation of the gag order AND the requirement to have any person they discuss the case with be vetted and sign orders regarding that access.It's probably acceptable for the State to do this as well.
IMO MOO
That's shameful. It's unethical ... and there's only one side suggesting that that is OK to do. Denial is akin to a river in Egypt and it is only flowing one way too IMO.