Court reporters and all staff will be there to transcribe.
GUILTY AZ - Daniel Rodriguez, 29, fatally shot by Phoenix PD officer, 5 Oct 2010 #3
- Thread starter popsicle
- Start date
Court reporters and all staff will be there to transcribe.
They would still be getting the questions on record even if they are handling them in chambers. And the lawyers would be present too, because they have to help formulate the answer. I guess it kind of makes sense that the judge is not handling them in open court since Chrisman has waived his right to be there for them. I guess it's just the judge's discretion on how they are reviewed and answered. It does make me wonder though what has been being asked. Also, does the family still have a right to be there, even if Chrisman is not? I would think yes.
I don't think we should read too far into the smiling jurors, in terms of which way they are leaning. Jodi's jurors were often seen smiling and laughing too. It doesn't mean they don't respect the process or that someone is dead. I wouldn't expect jurors to act somber all the time. Making this decision is a heavy burden. It's ok with me that they get it out a little.
I don't think we should read too far into the smiling jurors, in terms of which way they are leaning. Jodi's jurors were often seen smiling and laughing too. It doesn't mean they don't respect the process or that someone is dead. I wouldn't expect jurors to act somber all the time. Making this decision is a heavy burden. It's ok with me that they get it out a little.
Thanks Zuri. I deleted. It came out all wrong. Was in the middle of a phone call with an older friend trying to tell me how good facebook is and I should get an account.
Daniel's mom is crying because she lost her son. Flat out. Nothing bad or wrong. Nothing to be ashamed of, just crying because he will never be here again. Justice is no replacement.
bbm
Maybe Trial Diva Jen (or was it Sharee) is just confused...b/c wouldn't she have seen "activity" going to judge's chambers? I don't know where his chamber is in relation to where they wait (I'm assuming they wait in front of the courtroom or in a hallway?), but wouldn't she see if Juan or if Mehrens comes in? Because I haven't seen her tweet anything about the lawyers coming in yet. I would assume that if there is a question/note, then we would see both Juan and Mehrens, and that would alert Jen that there is something going on in chambers.
I could be wrong, though.
Well, let's just everybody have a good weekend and let's come back here Monday refreshed and prepared for ANY verdict/non-verdict. Also, we should be mentally prepared to have the verdict come on Tuesday or even Wednesday, who knows at this point?
Zuri
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2013
- Messages
- 8,782
- Reaction score
- 123
Thanks Zuri. I deleted. It came out all wrong. Was in the middle of a phone call with an older friend trying to tell me how good facebook is and I should get an account.
Daniel's mom is crying because she lost her son. Flat out. Nothing bad or wrong. Nothing to be ashamed of, just crying because he will never be here again. Justice is no replacement.
Oh thank you for clarifying. I agree with you totally. :seeya:
Oh, please do understand. She was talking about her pink rabbit ears on in her photo, she is 75, that is what the "nothing to be ashamed of" came from. Typing and talking, I could not pay attention. (Still not getting a facebook account, but she tried hard.)
LambChop
Former Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2008
- Messages
- 21,160
- Reaction score
- 30
The idea of holding a public trial is that nothing such as questions from the jury is hidden. There is no reason to hide information that a jury is deliberating from the public because it has already been exposed or the jury would not have it. jmo
:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
I'm hoping Sharee just misunderstood, I thought in that building there were no 'chambers' as such, just a private hallway outside of the courtroom where the judge and attnys spoke outside of the courtroom inhabitants' earshot. Even with court reporter and attnys, it still seems an opaque means of hearing and answering any jury questions.
My guess would be that if Elvira hasn't left the courtroom they weren't doing questions in chambers. I can't imagine Juan not having her present during questions.
I'm also guessing they left early to avoid the Friday rush hour. Who wants to work on Friday if you don't have to???
In the CMJA trial, it was a juror that wanted the guilty verdict that was kicked off after she was laughing in the hall so I'm not terribly worried about the smiles and arm in arm stuff either. We won't know until we KNOW. JMO Have a great weekend and thanks for letting me follow.
I'm also guessing they left early to avoid the Friday rush hour. Who wants to work on Friday if you don't have to???
In the CMJA trial, it was a juror that wanted the guilty verdict that was kicked off after she was laughing in the hall so I'm not terribly worried about the smiles and arm in arm stuff either. We won't know until we KNOW. JMO Have a great weekend and thanks for letting me follow.
Argh....not getting what is the hold-up here with the jury. IF VERGILLO WAS OUTSIDE, first of all how did he fire the taser so accurately from outside....how did he even KNOW to fire the taser if he didn't know what was going on inside. Secondly, Chrisman said he shot the dog after he dry-stunted (Sp?) Danny with the taser and Danny went down. So at this point, we know Vergillo struck Danny with the taser, then why would Vergillo all of a sudden just turn around after that and go back outside?? Also, then he hears GUNSHOT (dog), why would he not look and see oh my gosh, what just happened, I jsut heard a GUNSHOT?
The next thing in the sequence is Chrisman shoots Danny. So there's no way, even if Vergillo was outside in the beginning, just no way he would have not seen Chrisman shooting Danny. And him witnessing the shooting means he know exactly how it went down. Even if we somehow assume that in the beginning, Danny was outside or not paying attention like Chrisman said, even then he would have had to witness the actual shooting incident with Danny.
Am I missing something here?
The next thing in the sequence is Chrisman shoots Danny. So there's no way, even if Vergillo was outside in the beginning, just no way he would have not seen Chrisman shooting Danny. And him witnessing the shooting means he know exactly how it went down. Even if we somehow assume that in the beginning, Danny was outside or not paying attention like Chrisman said, even then he would have had to witness the actual shooting incident with Danny.
Am I missing something here?
Don't know about jurors in chambers, but, since it is Friday, perhaps they went in there. Still it is all taken down as part of the record.
It does not happen here, jurors in chambers, as Judge's chambers are very small, old buildings here.
If it happened, the Judge may not have wanted all jurors filing into seats.
I have to think that the "tweeters" (is that the right word) are cramming in words for tweet space and not getting the entire information across.
Perhaps it meant the Judge sent the answer from chambers and did not come out.
No matter, LambChop said it best, none of it is private. It is all part of the record.
It does not happen here, jurors in chambers, as Judge's chambers are very small, old buildings here.
If it happened, the Judge may not have wanted all jurors filing into seats.
I have to think that the "tweeters" (is that the right word) are cramming in words for tweet space and not getting the entire information across.
Perhaps it meant the Judge sent the answer from chambers and did not come out.
No matter, LambChop said it best, none of it is private. It is all part of the record.
That seems like the best explanation. They didn't say questions, they just said notes, and they would have sent a note asking to leave early today. You are probably right. aa is also right. If there were questions happening, even in chambers, there would be activity as the lawyers and victim's family would be called in.
I think the breaks/lunch/etc. are all dealt with the court bailiff or whoever is charged to take care of the jury. I would think they wouldn't need to send notes to judge about this, or the bailiff would discuss with the judge about those matters.
We do know, however, that at one point they requested tape and tape measure. Not sure how Trial Diva came to know of this. I'm thinking that those items, since not evidence, could have been obtained by just asking the bailiff, who went and got for them. So that would also require no note to Judge, however bailiff probably got Judge's approval before she gave it to them.
Hmmm.......:banghead::banghead::banghead:
I do remember that when the Zimmerman jury wanted to leave early and, I think the Josh Young jury wanted breaks (which was A LOT), they would send notes to the judge. Maybe through the bailiff. But still to the judge. Makes sense to me. As far as asking for evidence, doesn't that get sent to the judge as well?
You all are getting yourself's too hung up with this jury. The Trial Diva's do the tweeting for fun. They don't report like a reporter would, don't put to much faith into what the Diva's are saying.
Have a fun relaxing weekend and we can come back to 2 verdicts here and the Hayes Trial.
Have a fun relaxing weekend and we can come back to 2 verdicts here and the Hayes Trial.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
Staff online
-
SillybillyAdministrator
Online statistics
- Members online
- 122
- Guests online
- 2,895
- Total visitors
- 3,017