Replies

This charade of a trial was the most BIASED one I've ever seen in following over 200 trials. The BIAS from the onset is what sent me into overdrive.

I just saw the taped interview with jurors 10 & 6. Such immaturity I've not seen in a long time. They had to look at each other before answering a question!! (Shows they aren't free thinkers.) And some of their answers about the expert witnesses, appears to be grounds for immediate appeal, i.e., they didn't place credence on the "hired guns." (Did they mean they didn't discuss their testimony as part of deliberations?) And then they said, they "viewed all the evidence." How disgusting. Just when I didn't think things in this trial could get more disgusting.

AND.....They were calling the DNA on the jacket BLOOD! IT WASN'T BLOOD!!! BTW, the 2 jurors stated they "didn't bother to fill in any of the gaps." YIKES!!! (Help me, Lord.)

I just saw the taped interview with jurors 10 & 6. Such immaturity I've not seen in a long time. They had to look at each other before answering a question!! (Shows they aren't free thinkers.)

Seemed that they were communicating quite well ... letting the other finish before the other spoke. In fact this just indicated that they were not divided during the "guilt phase" of the trial (I don't know how they were during the "penalty phase"

They seemed very cohesive.

. They had to look at each other before answering a question!! (Shows they aren't free thinkers.)

No, that could show that they were being polite and deferential to each other in seeing who wanted to answer the question first.