Posted on 11/18/2021 5:48:31 PM PST by TigerClaws
Do not research any information that you personally think might be helpful to you in understanding the issues presented. Do not investigate this case on your own or visit the scene, either in person or by any electronic means. Do not read any newspaper reports or listen to any news reports on radio, television, over the internet, or any other electronic application or tool about this trial. Do not consult dictionaries, computers, electronic applications, social media, the internet, or other reference materials for additional information.
Do not seek information regarding the public records of any party or witness in this case. Any information you obtain outside the courtroom could be misleading, inaccurate, or incomplete. Relying on this information is unfair because the parties would not have the opportunity to refute, explain, or correct it.
Are we already in the 'reversible error' zone?
Maybe baiting a mistrial with prejudice.
*Ignore the nickname Lefty.
Ya, as if they are going to obey those rules.
This is a mistrial and the defense has to push for one...HARD.
I’m hoping there is not a plant or two on that jury.
I viewed too many movies, I think.
One with Demi Moore— something Witness?
Another, the great Runaway Jury with Gene Hackman.
If they have an alexa, or a cell phone, couldn’t they be spied upon to make sure they are not disobeying?
Maybe Karen plans to write rebuttals to each charge in order to prove her point for guilty verdict. In order not to miss any charges, she would need the instruction sheets.
Tomorrow all jurors will sit quietly like good little children while she lectures them.
That’s the only innocent answer I can think of for her request.
I have been on a jury several times and foreman twice. You are correct, No outside research or investigations.
I am quite shocked to hear she took home the instructions.
My guess is this will alienate her from the others even if she is the foreman.
My (hopeful but maybe unrealistic) thinking was that she was the lone holdout on some issue and wanted to take the instructions home, in a last-ditch effort to try to catch the others up on some minor point that she can present as a loophole....
Doesn’t the jurors have the instructions in the room during deliberation? Does a foreperson have extra privileges than the other jurors?
That’s what I’m wondering too!
This doesn’t seem right
The jury would be compromised?
Long deliberations usually are not a good sign for the defendant. However, all it takes is one jury member to prevent a conviction. I assume that if I was on the jury, based on the facts of the case as I know them, there is nothing that would convince me to convict Rittenhouse on any of the charges. I think the only one that had merit was dismissed.
It may be that the judge has already decided to grant a mistrial but is first allowing Rittenhouse to be exonerated, as the case may be. In fact, I can’t imagine a scenario in which he does not rule it a mistrial otherwise. The only question in my mind is whether it will be dismissed with prejudice.
In this trial I suspect at least some of the jury members are afraid for their lives. Surely they’ve got friends or family members telling them this. I’m surprised the jury was not sequestered for the whole trial. Or maybe, just maybe, the jury members have had their identities protected reasonably well. Maybe some even actually followed the rules.
Quite the show.
question for you or any legal beagles here on FR. Lets say they convict on two charges but hang on the rest, will Kyle still be sentenced on those two charges or will the judge declare a mistrial for all charges?
I’m not really a legal expert but my best guess is that if there is a mistrial with prejudice then none of the charges can be retried. I believe it would be considered double jeopardy. Can’t be charged with the same crimes twice.
I believe if it is dismissed without prejudice then it can be retried. But anything the jury has cleared him of cannot be retried. I’m not sure if the jury is allowed to render a partial verdict for just one of the charges and not reach a verdict on the others.
That’s my best guess of how it will work.
Yes. Mistrial.
yes but can the charges they agree on to convict, would they stick?
I don’t think there can be a partial mistrial when it is due to prosecutorial misconduct. The whole point is that the process has been corrupted.
It seems clear to me that Rittenhouse did not get a fair trial and, in fact, he never should have been charged at all. There was particularly egregious prosecutorial misconduct. However, the jury could acquit which would be better than a mistrial.
If they acquit on any charges, those charges cannot be retried even if they are hung on the others. But it is up to the judge whether to accept a partial jury verdict.
If the this travesty of justice is miss-trialed with prejudice you can bet the Feds will try KR on some other charges they concoct. This is 100% political and they will not take the loss sitting own. It is extremely unfortunate, but I am fairly sure about this and seldom wrong. DOJ is the enforcement arm of the Marxists party. They are even more emboldened than during Zimmerman.
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.