GUILTY FL - Dan Markel, 41, FSU Law Professor, Tallahassee, 18 July 2014 - #8 *arrests*

[Weki]

Ultimately, this was GC's case to lose. She had all the evidence she needed to get a conviction. If she doesn't, it's because she didn't argue the law well and she didn't present the evidence in a concise and clear manner. It's not the jury's fault.

 

[katiecoolady]

Even Harv too to a degree, but he obviously has Alzheimers.

Wow I had not heard that.

 

[rgrene]

Wow I had not heard that.

(Just a joke)

 

[katiecoolady]

Agreed!! So many of us said the same thing - that we were on the fence before she testified but she convinced us that she knew prior to the murder that it was going to happen and that she was culpable to assisting it to happen!
Yes - such a great job done on that podcast.

Makes me look at her initial interview very differently. To be honest I always felt a hinky feeling about it..she's just a little too slick. It's also got me wondering if she intended to set up LaCasse all along. She was throwing him under the bus almost immediately.

 

[katiecoolady]

(Just a joke)

Ok, gotcha. He's kind of an enigma in this whole thing.

 

[vislaw]

Ultimately, this was GC's case to lose. She had all the evidence she needed to get a conviction. If she doesn't, it's because she didn't argue the law well and she didn't present the evidence in a concise and clear manner. It's not the jury's fault.

I'm sorry, but I don't agree with your premise. Remember that both sides are selecting the jury and, depending upon the jury pool, lawyers are often faced with terrible Hobson's choice as they have to choose which juror candidates they should exercise a preemptory challenge to remove. Both attorneys for each defendant were striking every juror they felt would be unfavorable. Thus, the jury ultimately is a compromise and not within the prosecutor's control. You can be critical of her performance, but I don't think many here would disagree that the evidence is compelling and a reasonable person should be able to reach a conclusion. I found her argument to be persuasive and, although I wish her cross had been more extensive, the evidence is there and this jury should be able to reach a verdict.

 

[robocp01]

Ok, gotcha. He's kind of an enigma in this whole thing.

I think HA is recovering from brain cancer!

 

[Mariposa]

So say the jury convicts SG but hangs on KM.
The jury still has to sit through penalty phase on SG right? Death penalty case?

 

[Wishbone]

Well, that sucks. I'm so ready for this Adelson family to be held accountable.

Yes. Every last one of them including Wendi. I couldn't believe what she did with the children's names and that the paternal gparents have no visitation. That whole family facilitated the murder.

 

[MsArk]

Does this jury really believe SG was doing CA a direct favor? No way SG would have known anything about DM without KM! She is the link.

ETA- Actually, though, the state as about as much evidence on CA as they do KM! He should also be on trial.

 

[fred&edna]

@vislaw

I keep thinking of your Nizer quote yesterday - which I liked very much. I worry that these jurors need neti pots

ETA Wanted to link your post but failed lol. It is seriously worth re-reading!

 

[Marvin Berry]

Does this jury really believe SG was doing CA a direct favor? No way SG would have known anything about DM without KM! She is the link.

ETA- Actually, though, the state as about as much evidence on CA as they do KM! He should also be on trial.

The difference is that LR was able to directly implicate KM. He couldn't do so for CA.

 

[justice1960]

deleted.

 

[Weki]

I'm sorry, but I don't agree with your premise. Remember that both sides are selecting the jury and, depending upon the jury pool, lawyers are often faced with terrible Hobson's choice as they have to choose which juror candidates they should exercise a preemptory challenge to remove. Both attorneys for each defendant were striking every juror they felt would be unfavorable. Thus, the jury ultimately is a compromise and not within the prosecutor's control. You can be critical of her performance, but I don't think many here would disagree that the evidence is compelling and a reasonable person should be able to reach a conclusion. I found her argument to be persuasive and, although I wish her cross had been more extensive, the evidence is there and this jury should be able to reach a verdict.

I don't disagree with you and I too feel like the evidence is overwhelming and this jury should be able to reach a verdict. But I'm sure you'll agree that ultimately the state has the burden to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt. And the fact that these jurors are asking so many questions about how to apply the law to the facts and in light of GC not covering this in her 2 hour closing you have to ask whether the fault lies with her. At least some of it does. JMO.

 

[GordonX]

I thought GC did an excellent job - especially compared to the defense. Hindsight is 20/20. I'm hoping for the best but I'm prepared for the worst. The jury is always a wild card.

 

[rgrene]

I thought GC did an excellent job. Hindsight is 20/20. I hope for the best but I'm preparing for the worst. The jury is always a wild card.

Agree. Not a fan of the jury system of justice. Doesn't work for certain groups of people. Way too many criminals skate.

 

[MsArk]

I wonder if the judge will have them come in on Saturday if no verdict or still undecided on one. I hope the jurors don’t rush the verdicts just to leave. Still, I have a sinking feeling.

ETA- I realize most of us have followed the case closely but actually, it isn’t that complicated. Despite GC’s closing, I really thought she put on a good case.

 

[WatchingSouth]

In a college town you would hope that you would have an intelligent jury pool to choose from. Sadly, this may not be the case this time.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

The judge sent back a response that he needed clarification and for them to try to ask again. It's been 1 hour and 50 minutes and the jury has not come back to ask him for clarification and to re ask the question another way

 

[Gardenista]

In a college town you would hope that you would have an intelligent jury pool to choose from. Sadly, this may not be the case this time.

In my experience, college towns are where you find the least intelligence.