Posted on 11/19/2021 3:26:40 AM PST by RandFan
FOUR days of deliberations ?
This is an open and shut case.
What is going on, please?
I'm starting to feel the worst for Kyle.
Maybe they "got" to the jury. Jury intimidation is a real thing.
There is no way they should be taking this long!
ACQUIT!
This person doesn’t need this evidence for themselves.
They are trying to convince others.
In hindsight, I think Rittenhouse should’ve chosen a bench trial instead of jury.
It has been my personal experience that females (in general, not in totality) feel quite differently about this than men do.
And not in a good way.
The jury is scared for there lives. And it’s all political anyways. The state wants a mistrial. They want riots. There will be riots likely either way. But they want the violence.
That's a crapshoot too. Judges can't be trusted to follow the law. Their job is to to make it, and they like to make it up.
Ovaries
It's worse than that.
The State wants to use shock troops, in effect a Red Fighting Front to do things the State cannot (yet) do.
All the people here who call Antifa "brownshirts" need to brush up on their history of Germany in the 1920s.
Dachau was built for Antifa, when the Germans were finally sick of them.
Let's hope it doesn't come to that.
Hung jury would be my prediction.
Oh stuff it.
You clearly know nothing about juries or women.
This isn’t a demographics issue.
It’s a left vs right issue. The jury is probably mostly made up of in betweeners... the same ones who swing wisconsin politics back and forth. They are pliable and influenced easily.
I think you have 1 or 2 rogue leftists and I think you have 1 or 2 common sense conservatives and I don’t think any are budging.
It will be a hung jury no matter how long they stay in.
read later
That’s why I said, “in hindsight”. This judge seems fair.
Robert Barnes was fired by the defense lawyers due to their disagreement with him over jury selection strategy. Banes said that his polling of the jury pool showed him that 30% of the jury pool would vote guilty noatter what the evidence proves. He also told the defense that their strategy would virtually guarantee that half of the jurors ultimately seated would vote for conviction no matter what the evidence proves. And they fired him, but because it’s looking more and more like he was correct as the latest rumors about the deliberations is saying they’re deadlocked at 6-6.
I agree. I still don't trust any judge (well, maybe a handful). Most flip like squirrels.
In a criminal trial, it’s all jurors.
Barnes is one of the best. It’s a shame really.
Woke morons who hate America is the reason we have wokeness moron.
Some people are primarily fact-based decision makers, others make decisions based more on emotions. I suspect one or more of the latter may be on the jury. Effective, considerate and respectful communication by the other jurors - with specific & repeated references to the written instructions - can help reach a fact-based verdict.
If deliberation becomes prolonged, there is a human tendency to want to reach a conclusion, and therefore also an increasing tendency for some jurors to negotiate or compromise. This may on occasion be helpful, but can also result in one or more verdicts that are not based on the evidence presented.
Any judge is the highest authority in their courtroom; the judge in this case appears (to me at least) to retain a respect for the law, the jury, and the defendant. I believe there are one or more motions by the defense that the judge has not yet addressed, which he conceivably could have delayed out of respect for the jury process.
As with the people more closely involved with the trial, we'll just have to wait and see what happens. If the jury cannot reach a verdict on any of the counts, I would not be surprised (given the repeated professional/ethical missteps by the prosecution) to see this judge declare a mistrial with prejudice. If the jury negotiates one or more verdicts just so they can move on with life, I would not be surprised to see this judge honor the jury's verdict[s], and let the established appeals process deal with it.
There you have it - another opinion that's worth everything you paid for it!
;>)
He has. It’s really worth time even when nothing is happening in the trial room.
I figure it could possibly be 50/50. Karens who want to save their community and some hard core types that are not going to convict. I was on a jury like that 20 years ago.
This will end in a hung jury.
There you go. Frankly, if I’m guilty, I want a jury. If I’m innocent, a judge to decide.
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.