twomanywords
I know I meant to write toomanywords
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 593
- Reaction score
- 1
If the jury votes for LWOP is there still a penalty phase?
Thx
Thx
First, thanks to the lawyers who help us understand the details. I'm a longtime reader, first time poster. Linda Baden just said on HLN that she thinks that there is reversible error from LDB's closing since she implied that the drowning story was a lie, and that this would imply that the defense team knowingly presented what they knew to be untrue.
I know what reversible error is, but I don't know why that statement would imply that the defence team are lying.
I'm very concerned in general that if a guilty verdict that one of the very many mistrial motions from the defense. I fear that one of them might stick.
So, was there reversible error in LDB's closing argument?
If the jury comes back with 1st degree murder they will continue to be sequestered and not allowed to speak to the media until they have reached a verdict in the penalty phase.When the jury reaches a verdict, then they may or may not speak to the press in the room set up for that purpose, and yet they are still sequestered till the penalty phase is complete.
This is confusing to me, that they are sequestered from everyone but the press. Can someone please explain.
Also, thanks so much for all the legal questions answered, free legal talk, whoo hoo!
Bill Schaeffer said yesterday on WFTV that the jurors don't have the court transcripts available when they deliberate. Why on earth is that?
It seems to me that it's awfully iffy for them to have to rely on memory or the notes they variably did or didn't do in a six week trial. The attorneys weren't even sure the jurors are going to remember which witness was which and brought photos and other reminders in the closing speech (you know, the younger bug guy and the older bug guy, the heavy set witness, the one with an accent etc.) So how many of them are really going to remember what Maria Kish said about the car smelling or who saw Casey on which date and what she said about where Caylee was and what the chemists and nonchemists said about how they did the test they did and which results they got, etc. .
It seems to me that an awful lot is left to depend on the closing arguments and the interpretations of the sides, and it's not really about the credibility of the witnesses but the credibility of the attorneys if they can't go back and read what the witnesses really said but have to rely on the impression of the attorneys reminding them about what the attorneys think the witnesses said.
So why can't they get the transcripts?
What happens if she is found guilty and then someone else confesses to what really happened?
This is really two questions.Something I saw a commenter post on here the other day really sparked my interest although it's OT.
They said that killing someone while DUI is not felony murder but they felt it should be.
So it sparked my question
If you intentionally kill someone by vehicular homicide, BUT get drunk beforehand, would they not be able to find you guilty of murder 1?
TIA! I;m just curious..this is nothing I plan on doing. lol
What happens if she is found guilty and then someone else confesses to what really happened?