Originally Posted by kscornfed
the defense case has been seriously overdone, IMO. every witness has been on the stand too long. their direct of JA was painfully long, repetitive and dull. the 'story' they rehearsed was very obvious to me, complete with buzzwords ('linebacker', 'body slam' 'mortal terror', etc.).
the state's case took 9 days. the defense is desperate and it shows. plus, all this crap is cumulative----we've heard these stories over and over and over again.
i'm joining you in staying away until JM gets up there. i felt almost sick yesterday and i just can't do it again.
I agree with you completely. There is a legal objection called "cumulative", but since this is an expert, they can get away with it. I imagine the jury is bored out of their minds with this nonsense, and also awaiting JM's cross. Another major problem is the constant sidebars. They are mostly due to Willmot's inability to phrase a proper question and the judge's inability to instantly rule on an objection. It ain't that hard. I've read this is Stephens' first DP case. I think this is jury abuse.
Could it be, could it possibly be that the jury is the object of this excruciating drawn-out ordeal? Having already failed in proving self-defense, what is left to be won?
A mistrial or removal of too many jurors to continue.
If you make the trial experience excruciating, jurors may crack. This can lead to a motion for a mistrial and future appeals. The strategy then would be to offer again a plea deal to "save the victim's family from further ordeal."
I think the DT is doing this fully and completely on purpose, drawing this out as long as possible and running up the tab, which will also be presented to the prosecution as another reason to accept the plea deal.
Possible? What do you think?