Anyone know who the new lawyer is?
GUILTY FL - Doug Benefield, 58, shot and killed by estranged wife, Manatee County, 27 Sept 2020 #2
- Thread starter Tabulator
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
IIRC:
If the jury couldn't come to a unanimous vote wasn't the judge then calling a mistrial?
I heard that the hold out was the man who did agree to the lesser charge so they went with that.
I could have this all wrong.
Sustained
Justice for Stacy
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2008
- Messages
- 2,774
- Reaction score
- 7,113
Sustained
Justice for Stacy
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2008
- Messages
- 2,774
- Reaction score
- 7,113
Indeed she could but IMO, the likelihood of her getting a new trial is slim.
Last edited:
arielilane
Justice for Liz Barraza
Today, defense attorney will voir dire jurors individually. jmo
Sustained
Justice for Stacy
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2008
- Messages
- 2,774
- Reaction score
- 7,113
I believe the judge is interviewing each juror. Both the state and defense will be allowed to submit questions for the judge to ask.
Sustained
Justice for Stacy
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2008
- Messages
- 2,774
- Reaction score
- 7,113
Correct - it's an in camera hearing.
Tortoise
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 26,769
- Reaction score
- 135,362
Drat!
This is the actual comment that the brother of the juror allegedly posted online:
“She just text me this ‘PER SOURCES 5-1 GUILTY WITH MAN STUCK ON NOT GUILTY OR MANSLAUGHTER,'” the comment said.
As the prosecutors point out in the article, why would an actual juror write "per sources"?
“She just text me this ‘PER SOURCES 5-1 GUILTY WITH MAN STUCK ON NOT GUILTY OR MANSLAUGHTER,'” the comment said.
As the prosecutors point out in the article, why would an actual juror write "per sources"?
Last edited:
It looks to me like he's just not all that bright, and perhaps she did text him this, exactly as he posted it, but that was all she would have been wanting him to post, was just that sentence in between the quotes. But instead, he added "She just text me this" to it. If this theory is correct, she wanted him to say this info was "PER SOURCES" (keep it purposefully vague), and she definitely DIDN'T want him to say it came from her! So she told him to post exactly this: PER SOURCES 5-1 GUILTY WITH MAN STUCK ON NOT GUILTY OR MANSLAUGHTER.
Which he did. But then he also said "she just text me this"! Which messes everything up! If he'd posted just what she told him to post, it would make sense that she said it was to say "per sources", but since he added that before it, now they're right, it doesn't make sense, cuz why would SHE say "per sources"! But she thought he'd post just what she said, and SHE wouldn't figure in to it at all. So... I don't know if I'm explaining myself well here or not, but it does make perfect sense if you think about that, and it makes me think that the juror did send that to her brother, expecting him to post it publicly, so that's bad on her part. I guess she forgot that she'd need to make sure brother knew not to let on that it came from her! Probably thought nobody would have to be told that.