Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TexKat
And yes Martha took the day. I heard Judge Napolitano (sp?) say that one of the jurors that was interviewed after Martha was convicted had given Martha and her defense team a good reason for appeal in stating that they (some of the members of the jury) thought that Martha was making a mockery of the jury by not testifying.

The United States Court of Appeals will rarely -- and I mean very, very rarely -- overturn a jury verdict based upon what some jurors may have said or thought during deliberations even if contrary to the judge's instructions. When a juror during deliberations strays from the judge's instructions the other jurors are supposed to bring him back into line and if she refuses, then the other jurors are supposed to report the problem to the court before reaching a verdict. The judge will then reinstruct the jury as a whole and if the offending juror continues to ignor the instructions, then the judge will remove that juror from the panel. Once a verdict is reached, however, the deliberative process is generally off limits on appeal. The exception is when the jury as a whole answers "special interrogatories" submitted by the attorneys through the court and those answers show a gross misunderstanding of the law and the charge as applied to the facts of the case. But the post-trial statements of one or two jurors are not going to carry any weight on appeal.

2,941 posted on 03/06/2004 6:26:09 AM PST by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2802 | View Replies ]


To: Labyrinthos
She is very arrogant she will be exonerated and serve no time
2,944 posted on 03/06/2004 6:29:27 AM PST by JustPiper (The fly cannot be driven away by getting angry at it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2941 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson