This may have already been answered, but, in the case of an acquittal, are the reasons stated?
Only if the jurors decide to talk afterwards.
This may have already been answered, but, in the case of an acquittal, are the reasons stated?
Right. All the jurors need to state is the guilty or not guilty finding as the judge asks them how they find for each count.
In a jury trial, the judge is still the arbiter of the law, as in a non-jury trial.
However, the jury is "the trier of fact."
As I understand it, Judge Cardoza already decided that the state had met its burden of presenting sufficient evidence for conviction, when he let the prosecution rest its case and did not dismiss the case as he would have needed to if the state had failed.
That is, if all the evidence and witnesses are reliable and credible, then the burden has been met, and the jury should find him guilty. The jury does not need to decide on the law; the judge has done that. They are deliberating on the truth of the facts presented--that is the credibility of what they saw and heard during the trial.
It's got to help that the defendant's account of his actions in his interviews were absolutely exposed as fabrications, not even good ones.
Oh wow!Camera is being set up in the courtroom, stream is offline at the moment, will post link when it goes live.
Oh wow!
I'm just as nervous now as anyone else. The stakes are so high. They must convict or he goes free permanently. Please please please say the magic word guilty.
thank you geevee!
What happens in a mistrial? Anyone know?
You're welcome puakenikeni, it's still not live yet but here's the YT link:
[video=youtube;ZQbnSZzv53U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQbnSZzv53U[/video]
Defense is very chatty and seems in good mood.
Could it be a plea agreement?