[V_TWIN]

“A juror questionnaire in Massachusetts asks whether someone has been arrested, charged with a crime, or been served with a court order — all boxes that the holdout juror should have checked.”

The whole point of the story is to suggest he shouldn’t have even been in the jurt in the first place so the mistrial is bogus.

[Bernard]

So either nobody checks the answers, or maybe the questionnaire has a time limit, like “in the last 3 years” or something like that. After all, if people can walk out of an arrest with zero bail, why hold somebody's past against them?

[I-ambush]

[The whole point of the story is to suggest he shouldn’t have even been in the jurt in the first place so the mistrial is bogus.]

The result of this discovery after the fact would also be a mistrial, but I bet Clancy’s supporters think it means his vote is invalid, so she is acquitted.

Actually, I wonder if her defense lawyer knew of this, but figured he would be a “not guilty” vote, so did not object to his being on the jury.

[mdmathis6]

Since the name is not really public record, how is the man’s history to be found by reporters and internet sleuths? Who is doxxing this person and how? Those folks who are doing this can themselves be charged and pulled into court.