Love Never Fails
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2013
- Messages
- 12,935
- Reaction score
- 82,547
I read frequently but (obviously) hardly ever post. Please be gentle.
A few questions:
1. It is my understanding that during jury selection in a death penalty trial the question that is asked is: "Could you vote for the death penalty?" As opposed to: "If you find this person guilty, you will vote for the death penalty." Is that correct?
2. It is also my understanding that this jury has unanimously found CMJA guilty of murder in the first degree, with extreme cruelty. So what they are discussing now is mitigating factors. The difference between life and death?
3. What are they allowed to consider as mitigating factors? Is it limited to age (she was old enough to know better), mental incapacity (I consider her a psychopath, not mentally ill) or other things. Did some members of the jury buy the DV and child abuse stuff? I didn't.
I'm wondering here about mitigating factors. I wonder what they are discussing, because, to me, someone (s) on that jury is seeing mitigating factors.
I do think this jury is doing their job properly, unlike the Pinellas 12 (MOO). They are at least considering the issues and asking questions. If they were not carefully considering and debating the issues before voting for the DP, then they would not be doing their job. Holding someone's life in your hands is a very important decision.
1) yes
2) yes
3). Some lame excuses like she was just 27, her first murder, she is an artist, she will teach Spanish to inmates. Forgot the other three or four.
27 is old enough to know what premeditation is
Her first murder? Well, there's the dog.
An artist? Hardly.
Teach someone Spanish? She's been in five years and has only helped herself thus far.
Aso agree with you about the jury. Think some serious debating is going on. But they are tenacious.