Closing Arguments- Chase Merritt Charged W/Murder of Joseph, Summer, Gianni and Joe Jr McStay #2

[Tortoise]

Correction, I believe the archived photos are from a few weeks after the 12th.

The area was filmed on February 12th, showing the graves and the tire tracks.

Starts at 39:47

 

[la2cabo]

Does anyone know how long into the evening deliberations last?

I believe their practice so far has been to quit at 4:30.

I'm wondering if they aren't allowed to be in the courthouse after regular business hours. Them remaining in the courthouse would also mean the judge, bailiff, Merritt, etc. might also have to remain after hours. I don't think working into the night is as easy as we think.

 

[Blondiexoxo]

This verdict has to be unanimous, is that because it’s capital murder? Why not a majority or is that only for lesser charges?
The fact that 1 hold out could end in a not guilty verdict is worrying, if the one hold out refuses to change their mind then the other 11 votes mean nothing and he walks free? Am I getting that right?

 

[wary]

"Case", not "trial".

I didn’t phrase things carefully. Many things were part of the case, but did not make their way into the trial. If the jury members are at all conscientious and truthful, they will not know these things, and will not learn about them during the trial and deliberations. Those things will not influence the verdict.

I wanted to double-check that the supposed crossing the border into Mexico was one of these non-issues—something that even the defense didn’t want to bring into the trial.

 

[wary]

Does anyone know how long into the evening deliberations last?

The first two days, I think they ended at 4:30.

 

[la2cabo]

This verdict has to be unanimous, is that because it’s capital murder? Why not a majority or is that only for lesser charges?
The fact that 1 hold out could end in a not guilty verdict is worrying, if the one hold out refuses to change their mind then the other 11 votes mean nothing and he walks free? Am I getting that right?

All 12 jurors have to vote guilty or not guilty in order for it to be unanimous. If there are any holdouts, even one, then it would end in a mistrial.

 

[UndiscoveredTruth]

Cathy Russon‏ @cathyrusson 4m4 minutes ago
#McStay - The jury has officially resumed deliberations.

 

[wary]

This verdict has to be unanimous, is that because it’s capital murder? Why not a majority or is that only for lesser charges?
The fact that 1 hold out could end in a not guilty verdict is worrying, if the one hold out refuses to change their mind then the other 11 votes mean nothing and he walks free? Am I getting that right?

It has to be unanimous because it’s a criminal trial in California. I believe it would have to be unanimous if it were only a shoplifting trial.

For the record, the question of the death penalty should not enter into these deliberations. If they find him guilty of first degree murder, there will be another short trial, with the same jurors, to decide whether or not the death penalty is appropriate.

If the jury can not reach a unanimous decision, after a substantial amount of deliberation, there will be a mistrial, not a not guilty verdict. (‘Hung jury’ is the expression usually used.) This would leave the prosecution free to try him again. I feel confident that they would.

 

[Bennettfit]

Well, they've now been deliberating today for 10 minutes, time for lunch!

 

[MrsPC]

JD Crighton (@JDCrighton) | Twitter
#McStay: Jurors have resumed deliberations at 1:40 pm. Nine female, three male jurors.

1:43 PM - 4 Jun 2019

 

[MsFacetious]

I am concerned that these jurors will convict and the insanity and unprofessionalism that has been this trial will result in it being overturned on appeal.

I didn’t phrase things carefully. Many things were part of the case, but did not make their way into the trial. If the jury members are at all conscientious and truthful, they will not know these things, and will not learn about them during the trial and deliberations. Those things will not influence the verdict.

I wanted to double-check that the supposed crossing the border into Mexico was one of these non-issues—something that even the defense didn’t want to bring into the trial.

I think it didn't come in because even the defense conceded it was not the family. It could have come in to show a shoddy investigation of course. Maybe there was just enough other things that they elected not to add one more.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

This verdict has to be unanimous, is that because it’s capital murder? Why not a majority or is that only for lesser charges?
The fact that 1 hold out could end in a not guilty verdict is worrying, if the one hold out refuses to change their mind then the other 11 votes mean nothing and he walks free? Am I getting that right?

Hi Blondie. Its nice you are joining us.

Its infuriating to me too that one lone holdout can throw the case upside down causing it to be retried all over again.

At one time some state's allowed a majority vote rule, but only in the sentencing phase. Example: Joe Smith who was a pedophile...kidnapped, raped, and murdered 12 year old Carlie Bruisha in Florida, I may have her last name misspelled.

Anyway the guilt phase in all states have to be unanimous. However, until the USSC struck it down.. the sentence only had to be a majority vote in states who had enacted that law. A pastor was the foreman on the Smith case. He and others voted 10 to 2 for death, and he was sent to death row.

Now both phases in any trial must be unanimous in all states. If not unanimous in a death penalty trial the defendant is sentenced to LWOP when found guilty during the guilt phase.

At one time judges who presided over bench trials could also impose the death penalty if they felt that was the proper sentence. That rule has changed too by the USSC. Now all death penalty trials must always be decided by a jury trial in both phases. Only all 12 jurors can recommend death.

It's a strange rule imo especially when the USSC Justices themselves decide all cases before them based on a majority vote...not unanimously.

It's terrible to know only one individual can hijack a case, and hold justice hostage from victims receiving timely justice.

Hope this helps some.

Imo

 

[ilovesleep]

I believe their practice so far has been to quit at 4:30.

I'm wondering if they aren't allowed to be in the courthouse after regular business hours. Them remaining in the courthouse would also mean the judge, bailiff, Merritt, etc. might also have to remain after hours. I don't think working into the night is as easy as we think.

The first two days, I think they ended at 4:30.

Thank you both, la2cabo and wary!

 

[la2cabo]

Well, they've now been deliberating today for 10 minutes, time for lunch!

I'm confident they'll deliberate straight through until 4:30 with the exception of an afternoon break.

 

[Bennettfit]

The way I see it, the jury has been inconvenienced all along, let the court get a taste of its own medicine.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

The paint on bra and sledgehammer shows they were not killed after crossing into Mexico on the 8th, unless the killer followed them with a can of paint as well. The graves were filmed on google earth on the 12th.

IMO

The only way anyone could believe now it was really the Joey McStay family walking across the Mexican border is those who must believe the Walking Dead shows are nonfiction instead of being totally fictional.

Jmoo

 

[MsFacetious]

I believe their practice so far has been to quit at 4:30.

I'm wondering if they aren't allowed to be in the courthouse after regular business hours. Them remaining in the courthouse would also mean the judge, bailiff, Merritt, etc. might also have to remain after hours. I don't think working into the night is as easy as we think.

This is very possible too. I know we've seen cases where they deliberated as long as they wanted. Were those maybe smaller counties?

The way I see it, the jury has been inconvenienced all along, let the court get a taste of its own medicine.

In addition they are deliberating an extremely emotional and trying case after listening to all the details and being yanked around for 5 months.

Forcing and rushing deliberations is a surefire appellate issue. There is enough of those here already. Let them be.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

All 12 jurors have to vote guilty or not guilty in order for it to be unanimous. If there are any holdouts, even one, then it would end in a mistrial.

If it is a hung jury or mistrial the state will come out quickly thereafter announcing their plans to retry CM.

Usually retrials happen much quicker than when the initial first trial started.

Imo if it's a mistrial it will be retried within 6 to 9 months.

Jmoo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

This is very possible too. I know we've seen cases where they deliberated as long as they wanted. Were those maybe smaller counties?




In addition they are deliberating an extremely emotional and trying case after listening to all the details and being yanked around for 5 months.

Forcing and rushing deliberations is a surefire appellate issue. There is enough of those here already. Let them be.

How will any length of time it takes in deliberations result in a successful appeal?

Many capital cases have resulted in verdicts within hours of starting deliberations when either determining G or NG in death penalty cases.

Imho.

 

[la2cabo]

If it is a hung jury or mistrial the state will come out quickly thereafter announcing their plans to retry CM.

Usually retrials happen much quicker than when the initial first trial started.

Imo if it's a mistrial it will be retried within 6 to 9 months.

Jmoo

6 to 9 months in Southern California? Not very likely. Lol