Patty G
Retired WS Staff
I wonder if he is capable of finding someone guilty if he actually saw a murder first hand?
2011.05.14 - Jury Selection DAY SIX (Afternoon Session)
- Thread starter ynotdivein
- Start date
-
CA CA - Lesner Noe Velasquez Cardenas, 21, Redding, 29 May 2025
- Latest: EnigmaticEpiphany
- Status
Brattigirle
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2009
- Messages
- 1,415
- Reaction score
- 2
This video made me cry, I have lost a daughter and I totally agree with this PJ. How if ICA is innocent could she listen to this womans story and sit there untouched? GUILTY
TigerBalm
Pray for all the missing and innocent people whose
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 6,189
- Reaction score
- 22
But the jurors are only hearing it for the first time.
Well, they really should take us into consideration here :crazy:
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2008
- Messages
- 7,152
- Reaction score
- 3,618
OMG the defense is objecting this??
I should've known.
I should've known.
I may be wrong - trying to remember what I read in the lawyers thread...... I'd better check!
Rallihanna
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 813
- Reaction score
- 2
Juror excused! Over objections of defense of course.
sleutherontheside
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2009
- Messages
- 9,874
- Reaction score
- 4
When HHJP makes this face.......it makes me laugh and smile every time.
logicalgirl
Peace Hawk
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 16,024
- Reaction score
- 2
Well that was a waste of a half hour we need.
whiteangora
I'm on the right track baby. I was "Born This Way"
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,748
- Reaction score
- -2
Has anyone been chosen so far today?
Blue Jackets fan
New Member
- Joined
- May 9, 2011
- Messages
- 1,124
- Reaction score
- 0
The jurior got....
Openmyeyes
On the road to Utopia
Cause is he can't follow the courts requirements...dt wants to object and the judge wins: He's a goner.
Rallihanna
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 813
- Reaction score
- 2
Well of course they want the juror who can't find her guilty at all!
Chiquita71
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 3,835
- Reaction score
- 3
1167:
HHJP: I hope you are feeling better today.
yes.
HHJP: tell me what did you eat so I know not to eat it.
I think I was just thrown off my schedual.
HHJP: now did you heed not to watch or read?
I did.
HHJP: did you heed not to discuss this case other than you being away?
yes.
HHJP: did you follow instruction re: internet searches?
yes.
HHJP: facebook, twitter, any social media?
no.
HHJP: before you came to court, did you hear about this case in the past?
yes.
HHJP: tell us the source.
only television and it was about the searches in Orlando.
HHJP: what do you remember seeing on tv about the event?
the only thing I remember is the victim was found several months later.
HHJP: do you recall anything else about the VICTIM?
no, it was a child and the mother was accused.
HHJP: any reports regarding the facts surrounding what the mother was accused of?
until you read the counts against her, no.
HHJP: did you hear anything about the type of things one would consider evidence that they talked about?
something the victim was wrapped in, CSI stuff. Something about the trunk of a car, I don't know what car.
HHJP: wrapped in?
plastic bag, maybe a carpet but it gets all mixed up.
HHJP: what about the trunk?
evidence of decomposition, in the carpet or something.
HHJP: any other details you can recall at this time.
the accused was in jail, or custody for a time.
HHJP: I take it that you say she was in jail for a time, you heard reports that she was out of jail for a time.
yes.
HHJP: anything else you can recall?
she doesn't get along with her mother, apparently.
HHJP: anything else?
(boy it just keeps on coming, and coming...I guess he knows alot! )
the state is paying for her defense.
HHJP: anything else?
I guess there is something in there but...I am not overly interested in this type of news.
HHJP: it just happened to be on?
It just happened to be on. If it was tivo ed, I would have gone past.
HHJP: any tv shows like NG?
LAUGHS, NO...not on my radar.
HHJP: GR?
NO.
HHJP: now have you had and discussions with anyone about this case that may have come up?
no.
HHJP: as a result of what you have gleened from news accounts of this case what opinion if any do you have about this case?
from you instructions she is innocent until proven guilty.
HHJP: but up until I gave you these instruction, did you have an opinion?
no.
HHJP: if you were selected to be a juror in this case. you would be called upon to use only the evidence provided in court per the instructions I would give you. Some people can put it aside and some can't and do that quite well. Other people including myself when it comes to certain topics, can't do that. Would you be willing to put aside anything you heard in news reports and make your decision soley on the evidence as applied against the law?
yes
HHJP: any reservation or hesitation about your ability to do that?
the only reason is I am totally against capitol punishment.
HHJP: beyond and to the exclusion...of doubt.
I would have to go beyond that...
HHJP: you remember the instruction I gave you regarding reasonable doubt? let me tell you what a reasonable doubt is.
(I lost it and....)
you must find the defendant because the doubt is reasonable. it is the evidence that is introduced that you must look for that proof. conflict of evidence or lack of evidence. if you have reasonable doubt you should find them not guilty and vice versa...do you have a problem with that?
no.
HHJP: there are two possibilites in this case death and LWOP. The questions I am about to ask you, is putting the cart before the horse. the first thing we have to determine is whether the defendant is guilty before we can even get to a second phase. we need to ask these questions because we can't wait till we get there to ask them. it is not any indication of anything. as you pointed out earlier the defendant is presumed innocent. the sa must prove it to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. even tho an individual may have strong opinions and opposed to the DP, that person can be qualified to serve as a juror if they are able to abide by the court's instructions. I talked about the mit and agg factors, I explained the different burdens of proof. One thing I told you and I will reread to you a portion : the sentince that you recommend to the court must be based on the evidence presented after weighting agg and mit cir and you find one agg exists and the mit does not outweigh agg or in the absense of mit circumstances, or the agg circumstances are significant you may vote for death. you are neither compelled nor required to give a sentence of death.
or in absense of mit that the agg are not sufficient you must recommend LWOP rather than a sentence of death. it is not a mechanical process, the law sees that different factors may be given different weight by different jurors. You are to decide what weight each factor has. despite your DP views, would that keep you from finding her guilty?
yes
HHJP: are you telling me that you are so concerned that if you find her guilty of murder, that she would be exposed to the possibilty of the DP, that would make you not able to find her guilty.
I physically would not be able to do that.
HHJP: even if the evidence warrented it you could not because of your concern of the dp?
yes.
HHJP: lastly, would you automatically vote against the imposition of the dp, without regards to the evidence that was shown to you or the instructions I gave you in this case?
yes. unable to go in that direction.
HHJP: one of the things I told you sir, this process is depending on people being truthful and that is the hallmark of jury service, to let everyone know where they stand. I thank you for you candor. With that you can step outside and an answer in a minute. Glad you are feeling better.
Thank you.
HHJP: this juror will be excused over the objections of the defense.
(So, ICA wrote: Get THIS guy!!! ) ? (joke) not real.
HHJP: I hope you are feeling better today.
yes.
HHJP: tell me what did you eat so I know not to eat it.
I think I was just thrown off my schedual.
HHJP: now did you heed not to watch or read?
I did.
HHJP: did you heed not to discuss this case other than you being away?
yes.
HHJP: did you follow instruction re: internet searches?
yes.
HHJP: facebook, twitter, any social media?
no.
HHJP: before you came to court, did you hear about this case in the past?
yes.
HHJP: tell us the source.
only television and it was about the searches in Orlando.
HHJP: what do you remember seeing on tv about the event?
the only thing I remember is the victim was found several months later.
HHJP: do you recall anything else about the VICTIM?
no, it was a child and the mother was accused.
HHJP: any reports regarding the facts surrounding what the mother was accused of?
until you read the counts against her, no.
HHJP: did you hear anything about the type of things one would consider evidence that they talked about?
something the victim was wrapped in, CSI stuff. Something about the trunk of a car, I don't know what car.
HHJP: wrapped in?
plastic bag, maybe a carpet but it gets all mixed up.
HHJP: what about the trunk?
evidence of decomposition, in the carpet or something.
HHJP: any other details you can recall at this time.
the accused was in jail, or custody for a time.
HHJP: I take it that you say she was in jail for a time, you heard reports that she was out of jail for a time.
yes.
HHJP: anything else you can recall?
she doesn't get along with her mother, apparently.
HHJP: anything else?
(boy it just keeps on coming, and coming...I guess he knows alot! )
the state is paying for her defense.
HHJP: anything else?
I guess there is something in there but...I am not overly interested in this type of news.
HHJP: it just happened to be on?
It just happened to be on. If it was tivo ed, I would have gone past.
HHJP: any tv shows like NG?
LAUGHS, NO...not on my radar.
HHJP: GR?
NO.
HHJP: now have you had and discussions with anyone about this case that may have come up?
no.
HHJP: as a result of what you have gleened from news accounts of this case what opinion if any do you have about this case?
from you instructions she is innocent until proven guilty.
HHJP: but up until I gave you these instruction, did you have an opinion?
no.
HHJP: if you were selected to be a juror in this case. you would be called upon to use only the evidence provided in court per the instructions I would give you. Some people can put it aside and some can't and do that quite well. Other people including myself when it comes to certain topics, can't do that. Would you be willing to put aside anything you heard in news reports and make your decision soley on the evidence as applied against the law?
yes
HHJP: any reservation or hesitation about your ability to do that?
the only reason is I am totally against capitol punishment.
HHJP: beyond and to the exclusion...of doubt.
I would have to go beyond that...
HHJP: you remember the instruction I gave you regarding reasonable doubt? let me tell you what a reasonable doubt is.
(I lost it and....)
you must find the defendant because the doubt is reasonable. it is the evidence that is introduced that you must look for that proof. conflict of evidence or lack of evidence. if you have reasonable doubt you should find them not guilty and vice versa...do you have a problem with that?
no.
HHJP: there are two possibilites in this case death and LWOP. The questions I am about to ask you, is putting the cart before the horse. the first thing we have to determine is whether the defendant is guilty before we can even get to a second phase. we need to ask these questions because we can't wait till we get there to ask them. it is not any indication of anything. as you pointed out earlier the defendant is presumed innocent. the sa must prove it to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. even tho an individual may have strong opinions and opposed to the DP, that person can be qualified to serve as a juror if they are able to abide by the court's instructions. I talked about the mit and agg factors, I explained the different burdens of proof. One thing I told you and I will reread to you a portion : the sentince that you recommend to the court must be based on the evidence presented after weighting agg and mit cir and you find one agg exists and the mit does not outweigh agg or in the absense of mit circumstances, or the agg circumstances are significant you may vote for death. you are neither compelled nor required to give a sentence of death.
or in absense of mit that the agg are not sufficient you must recommend LWOP rather than a sentence of death. it is not a mechanical process, the law sees that different factors may be given different weight by different jurors. You are to decide what weight each factor has. despite your DP views, would that keep you from finding her guilty?
yes
HHJP: are you telling me that you are so concerned that if you find her guilty of murder, that she would be exposed to the possibilty of the DP, that would make you not able to find her guilty.
I physically would not be able to do that.
HHJP: even if the evidence warrented it you could not because of your concern of the dp?
yes.
HHJP: lastly, would you automatically vote against the imposition of the dp, without regards to the evidence that was shown to you or the instructions I gave you in this case?
yes. unable to go in that direction.
HHJP: one of the things I told you sir, this process is depending on people being truthful and that is the hallmark of jury service, to let everyone know where they stand. I thank you for you candor. With that you can step outside and an answer in a minute. Glad you are feeling better.
Thank you.
HHJP: this juror will be excused over the objections of the defense.
(So, ICA wrote: Get THIS guy!!! ) ? (joke) not real.
nursebeeme
Registered User
- Joined
- May 3, 2008
- Messages
- 53,158
- Reaction score
- 225
1251 at almost the actual time of 1251
fingers crossed
fingers crossed
- Status
Similar threads
Staff online
-
FraizeAdministrator
Online statistics
- Members online
- 145
- Guests online
- 595
- Total visitors
- 740