GUILTY GA - Laila Daniel, 2, beaten to death, McDonough, 17 Nov 2015 *foster parents arrested*

[beatrixpotter]

This reporter has been a reporter with AJC for a while. Why did she do that? Just a total lost her mind brain fart?

 

[Gardenista]

Not impressed with how the judge handled this juror situation AT ALL. Will be big grounds for appeal if they are convicted.

ETA, Mull probably sees the writing on the wall which is why she is not making a big fuss. She wants the appeal.

 

[Gardenista]

This reporter has been a reporter with AJC for a while. Why did she do that? Just a total lost her mind brain fart?

Makes me concerned this happens more often than we know.

 

[beatrixpotter]

Not impressed with how the judge handled this juror situation AT ALL. Will be big grounds for appeal if they are convicted.

ETA, Mull probably sees the writing on the wall which is why she is not making a big fuss. She wants the appeal.

I'm afraid you are right.

 

[Tortoise]

Judge just re-charged the jury on those matters of being a party to a crime and knowledge, and they're back to deliberating.

 

[Tortoise]

This reporter has been a reporter with AJC for a while. Why did she do that? Just a total lost her mind brain fart?

She should have been barred from the courtroom for the rest of the trial. That's what happened in the recent Charles Merritt/McStay murder deliberations when a documentary maker approached an alternate juror outside to ask if he would agree to be interviewed after the trial. Banned from the courthouse!

 

[Tortoise]

Something going on again - another note I think, heard the judge saying juror no.31 and he's writing a note

Verdict Watch: Jennifer and Joseph Rosenbaum Tried in Death of Foster Child

 

[Tortoise]

I think it's to do with her appointment that was scheduled last week, and deliberations starting at 10 am tomorrow.

 

[Tortoise]

No, she's rescheduled her test until after deliberations are over. They'll be starting at 9 am as usual.

 

[Tortoise]

Prosecutor Mr Chase has found case law which decided that it was appropriate for the judge to answer a yes or no question as the jury asked earlier, and the judge is going to look at it overnight. Corinne is not happy, she thinks re-charging the jury was the proper thing to do - in other words sending them back with exactly the same words that they didn't understand the first time.

 

[Tortoise]

Has the prosecution failed to explain the charges properly to the jury? I hope an acquittal for Joseph won't be down to a failure of the jury to understand the law and how it applies. I thought they made it very clear that it was because he knew and did nothing about it. No one has said he was persuading Jennifer to do it.

 

[Josephine9]

Good Morning.
Yesterday I was offline and just reading.

There should be a law not to harass a jury during an ongoing trial. And that one has to pay for the follow-up costs. This should apply to everyone.

 

[Tortoise]

"The juror told the judge that he was asked how far along they were.

"He said that he had answered, "I don't know," and that was all he'd said.

[...]

"11Alive reached out to the AJC for a comment on the situation. The paper's editor, Kevin Riley, confirmed they were aware of the interaction and shared a statement on the matter:

"Our reporter told AJC editors that she greeted a juror with 'How’s it going?' She said she was not seeking information about deliberations and that her intent was misunderstood. The judge addressed the matter in court and said the juror could continue to consider the case fairly. The AJC, as a news organization, understands how sensitive jury deliberations are and takes the fairness of trials seriously. We regret this incident."

Judge reprimands AJC reporter accused of speaking to Rosenbaum juror on break

 

[Josephine9]

Thanks again for your help, Tortoise!

She said she was not seeking information about deliberations and that her intent was misunderstood.

Very credible I cannot stand such sharks.

 

[Josephine9]

This reporter has been a reporter with AJC for a while. Why did she do that? Just a total lost her mind brain fart?

She doesn´t care, too self-centered.

 

[Josephine9]

ok, her home page makes me want to barf. do these people sell their souls to defend child molesters and rapist?

I felt the same way and she seems to love slogans.

 

[Jewels53]

Knowing that was a juror the reporter should not have spoke to her at all! imo

 

[Tortoise]

I've typed up the judge's response to the jury's question:

"The question you asked, and I’m just gonna read it, it says ‘parties to crime 30 July 19’, that’s the top, the substance of the question is ‘to be guilty as party to a crime must the defendant be present at the time of the crime? Thank you for considering this question’, and then signed by your foreperson.

And after having discussed this question with the attorneys and considering possible responses, what we want to do is direct your attention back to the charge, and in particular charges no.27, 28, 29 and 30. I’m going to read them.

No.27. Every party to a crime may be charged with and convicted of commission of the crime. A person is a party to a crime only if that person

a. Directly commits the crime,

b. Intentionally helps in the commission of the crime, or

c. Intentionally advises, encourages, hires, counsels or procures another to commit the crime.

Charge on page 28 is the charge of knowledge. Knowledge on the part of a defendant that the crime was being committed and that a defendant knowingly and intentionally participated in or helped in the commission of such crime must be proved by the state beyond a reasonable doubt. If you find from the evidence in this case that a defendant had no knowledge that a particular crime was being committed or that a defendant did not knowingly and intentionally commit, participate or help in the commission of any particular alleged offense, it will be your duty to acquit that defendant as to any such offense. On the other hand should you find beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant had knowledge that a particular crime was being committed and that the defendant knowingly and intentionally participated or helped in the commission of it, then you would be authorized to convict that defendant.

A jury is not authorized to find a person who is merely present at the scene of the commission of a crime at the time of its perpetration guilty of consent in and concurrence in the commission of the crime, unless the evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt that such person committed the alleged crime, helped in the actual perpetration of the crime, or participated in a criminal endeavour.

A jury is not authorized to find a person who is merely associated with other persons involved in the commission of a crime guilty of consent in or concurrence in the commission of the crime, unless the evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt that such person helped in the actual perpetration of the crime or participated in the criminal endeavour.

So that is the set of instructions that relate to the issue that you have raised in your note and at this time I will excuse you to your jury room."


starts at 25:43

 

[Tortoise]

Something going on again. Mull is complaining, it's to do with the media but I haven't found out yet what she is asking for.

 

[Tortoise]

Mull: jurors "are getting these media blasts to their phone"

Judge has just asked the jury to go to recess.