7
Posted on 11/16/2021 7:26:19 AM PST by Pilgrim's Progress
Don't know how lively this thread will be, but there is coverage of sorts going on so I figured it merited a thread for FReepers to comment on and post updates as they occur.
I guess the jury has probably selected a foreperson by now and have moved on to deciding where to go to lunch.
This situation assumes all jurors are pure and honest and would not lie about another juror.
He had a rifle for self defense.
The difference between an AR15 a 30.06, a bolt action or a Winchester is nothing when it comes to defense. Projectile.
He was not there with malicious intent. He was there to serve and protect.
He was attacked in all three incidents, not the aggressor.
Acquit. Period.
Not budging.
Jurors can still be disqualified, even during deliberations.
How many card hands have they gone through by this time?
I’ll bet my day’s salary
***This is sumthin I find quite frustrating because not even http://www.predictit.org has a contract on this case we can bet on.
Isn’t it, UUUUUUUHhhhhhhhhhhh…..
7
“No.
In order to take the case from the jury, he has to rule that no reasonable jury would not find self defense.”
Sounds like the perfect case for the Judge to do just that.
“This situation assumes all jurors are pure and honest and would not lie about another juror.”
+++++++++
Unfortunately, honesty used to be a given, but now it is just the opposite. Don’t forget, these jurors have been together in the jury room on and off for several days now. Commonalities have been discovered and relationships have been formed. I doubt you would be able to force all the other jurors to gang up on one to force them off the jury. I would think one person with a conscience would speak up.
BLM can observe how many NG troops go to Kenosha, Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay, etc. The original Kenosha riot happened because BLM thought it would be lightly defended (both in terms of force and officials’ support of police).
Especially if the judge has already to decided to end his career with this case.
I think the rule is: A judge can do anything he darn well wants to do!
“only 4 white males (white males tend to be conservative and pro 2A)”
And I would guess white males would be less easily intimidated.
Does the decision need to be unanimous?
You mean those guys wearing military garb and carrying what will look indistinguishable from AR15s?
Just what is a Guard member supposed to do if a rioter grabs the muzzle of his rifle and attempts to take it? Doesn’t that put us right back where we started?
Remember the Iranian hostage crisis. Iranians were chanting, “America can do nothing”. Then Reagan took office and the hostages were released. Will the Guard be Reagan or will they be Carter?
When I was on guard duty in the Army with a loaded weapon, the consequences for trying to disarm me were quite clear. You would be shot. Will the Guard have ammunition or just odd looking clubs?
Now that’s interesting; I would have assumed that there was betting in the UK on it
Does the decision need to be unanimous?
—
yes
Grosskreutz
“before he vaporized my bicep”
I fell out of my chair laughing.
yeah, right after you pointed your gun at Kyle’s head
It is remarkable, the liberal animal. Ship of fools.
I’ve always been under the impression that a guilty verdict in a capital murder case needs to be unanimous.
It’s sketchy, at best.
Remember that video of a guy touching the barrel of a female’s rifle and she slugged him? Classic!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.