[antisocial]

Here's what conservative leader Phyllis Schlafly wrote:
"After the trial, two jurors gave sworn statements that they had been pressured to render a guilty verdict and did not understand that a hung jury was possible."

Specifically, these jurors confided to the defense lawyer that the jury foreman told them the judge had said all jurors had to agree on the verdict, that it HAD to be unanimous.

Believing they were compelled by law to vote with the majority, at least three jurors changed their vote! Two were in tears as the verdict was read.

Turns out the judge had said no such thing. If these three are to be believed, what the foreman said was untrue.

And that's not all that was fishy. When the verdict was announced, U.S. Attorney Sutton said in part:

"...when law-enforcement officers use their badge as a shield for carrying out crimes and then engage in a coverup, we cannot look the other way. Agents Compean and Ramos shot an unarmed, fleeing suspect in the back and lied about it."

However, when a rumor spread that Compean and Ramos might get probation, Sutton issued a three-page statement to the media in which he said:

"[The two agents] fired their weapons at a man who was attempting to surrender by holding his open hands in the air."

Was he fleeing or was he attempting to surrender? In the Justice Department these days, you can apparently have it both ways.

[joe fonebone]

ok.......so these two jurors did not have the gonads to stand by their belief in innocence, regardless of what the other 10 members thought. I do not believe them.

[Terabitten]

After the trial, two jurors gave sworn statements that they had been pressured to render a guilty verdict and did not understand that a hung jury was possible."

Specifically, these jurors confided to the defense lawyer that the jury foreman told them the judge had said all jurors had to agree on the verdict, that it HAD to be unanimous.

If true, then it should be easy to get a mistrial declared.

Was he fleeing or was he attempting to surrender?

Who cares? You can't shoot people in either circumstance. When Compean and Ramos started shooting, the only thing Davila was guilty of was failure to stop for an immigration status check. Does that justify use of deadly force?