ScarlettScarpetta
When the going gets tough, drink coffee
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2012
- Messages
- 12,690
- Reaction score
- 175
Mostly voir dir problems and jury problems as a whole
Carptastic.
Another looney.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Mostly voir dir problems and jury problems as a whole
Chris did an interview with Gold earlier. Said there is no way Travis and Jodi had any sex prior to those email were exchanged btwn Sky/Travis in Jan 07
Sky saying she knows of three women Travis helped leave abusive relationships and no way he ever hurt Jodi
I'm not even sure you could say that they had declared they were hung, they were as surprised as some of us were when JSS suddenly declared that when they sent in more questions, which JSS had told them to do if they needed to...
Dalias retrial starts soon. She won an appeal
Another one. where The victim was put on trial. Thank God he was still alive to tell his truth to The jury
Does anyone know how to watch the Chris Hughes spreecast from the other night?
I just noticed that as I searched for the judge. What a world. I know Mark Goodman's conviction was also overturned, but he was found guilty for a second time. Hope Dalia is, too!
I know, right? Mike was a hoot on the stand but also a real stand-up guy imo. Calling the defense lawyer a parrott... lol
There is no advantage to them all switching to life. JSS still gets to decide if its life w possible parole or LWOP. If I were on the jury and voted for death, which I would bc the law supports the death sentence in this case, I would rather hang the jury, I would be shocked if jurors who want death felt any differently.
I think its complete garbage that the jury can pick death but can't pick which version of life that they want a defendant to have. I mean, really? That really puts some jurors in a tight spot if they don't feel like a death sentence is the right choice but also feel very strongly that the person should never have the potential to walk free again. Especially with the killer they are dealing with. Maybe some feel the mitigating factors are sufficient enough to save her life (why, I don't know) but also feel she is far too dangerous to have a chance to get paroled in the future. I think that is really a really unfair position for the jurors to be in.
Dalias retrial starts soon. She won an appeal
This may be the wrong time and place to post this but someone mentioned that 70% of DP convictions are overturned on appeal. I honestly think LWOP is the more secure option. I don't care if she exploits her environment for all it's worth, it will still suck, and she'll most likely know she's not going anywhere. The DP will give her hope, warranted or not.
I know there were 8 or 9 mitigating factors listed in the jury instructions for the jury to consider in their deliberations. (right?)
Was there also a list of x number of aggravating factors for the jury to weigh against the mitigators, or are they to weigh the mitigators against the all the state's evidence in total? (including Juan ripping the defense experts to shreds)
As always, "TIA" in advance.
I think its complete garbage that the jury can pick death but can't pick which version of life that they want a defendant to have. I mean, really? That really puts some jurors in a tight spot if they don't feel like a death sentence is the right choice but also feel very strongly that the person should never have the potential to walk free again. Especially with the killer they are dealing with. Maybe some feel the mitigating factors are sufficient enough to save her life (why, I don't know) but also feel she is far too dangerous to have a chance to get paroled in the future. I think that is really a really unfair position for the jurors to be in.
Bringing this over from the previous thread...
But the people who know the law and the rules of the law aren't the ones who need to ask questions. It's the laypeople on the jury who sometimes need clarification of the law so that they can accurately apply the law to the case they are rendering a verdict on. IMO it's always a positive sign when a jury asks questions. It indicates that they are taking their role seriously and not just haphazardly checking off a box on the verdict form. I fail to see how a jury asking questions to ensure they have a clear understanding of the law can be considered a bad thing.
To be clear, the first jury didn't say "no DP." They hung. There's a big difference. And double jeopardy doesn't attach until a unanimous verdict is reached.