Posted on 04/29/2010 12:07:13 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
KNOXVILLE - Federal court jurors reported today they have reached a verdict on three of four charges against former University of Tennessee student David C. Kernell, accused of illegally accessing the private e-mail account of 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
But they also reported they are deadlocked on the first count, a charge of identity theft.
Without asking what their verdict is on the other counts, U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Phillips sent them back to the jury room to continue deliberating the first count.
In their written communication to the judge this afternoon, the jurors said: "Some of us feel not all jurors are following the jury instruction."
On its third morning of deliberations, the East Tennessee jury pondering charges against Kernell asked to review a federal law addressing identity theft. That's the count on which the jurors deadlocked.
After some discussion with lawyers, Phillips decided today to give them a copy of the law - with some sections blacked out that he said are irrelevant to the case.
Jurors then indicated they wished to go to lunch. The panel is expected to resume deliberations at 1 p.m. today.
(Excerpt) Read more at knoxnews.com ...
Even the USSC compelled Pres Clinton to testify in Paula Jones’ civil case even though Pres Clinton felt he was just “too important” at the time to do so because he was President of the US. The USSC told Pres. Clinton that no one is above the law.
But, we're not talking about that, are we? :-)
What we're talking about is that no one can tell any juror how to cast his vote for guilty or not guilty and no one enforce with a juror how he will make that determination for that vote.
Once the juror knows that his vote for guilty or not guilty is his alone and no one can enforce any "methodology" he wants to apply for that vote ... then he'll understand that if there is an unjust law that should not be enforced in the case he's on -- he can simply vote that way, so to not enforce it.
And there's nothing anyone can do about his vote...
I'm sure that scares the hell out of a lot of judges and lawyers... but that's the way it is ... :-)
The justices were on the approved witness list.
It was appealed on that ground as well as many other constitutional grounds.
It was a pro se litigant, but a litigant who actually knew what he was doing.
Do you find it impossible to believe that all the members of a state supreme court could be corrupt in order to protect other members of the judiciary?
If not corrupt, why would they hide the fact that the case was even appealed and why did it never appear on a docket available to the public?
What if a city passed a law banning the ownership of firearms for any reason? Based on your argument, a jury would have to convict a defendant because that was the law.
Why shouldn’t a jury acquit the person in spite of the judge’s instructions?
One of the main purposes of juries is so that there is a way for society to restrain the exercise of unfettered power by the state.
regarding issue on identity thief. I think the jury are confused between definition of identity thief and thief. Sure, the information he gathered were from public source, but PRETENDING to be someone you’re not to gain access to an account, IS identity thief
i knew ppl, even here, would have issues with this. He did steal someone’s identity to gain access to the account though. He was pretending to be Sarah Palin by trying out different password combinations. Pretending to be someone you’re not, is identify thief
if i sign a check with a fake signature of someone else. Thats identify thief.
If what he did is not identify thief, what would be id thief
Left wingers care more about outcomes while conservatives care more about process. In the end left wingers win
Would you commit evil to take down a greater evil or would you stand firm in your ideals thus allowing greater evil to win
Did you know who this “kid’s” father is? I wouldn’t count on him NOT being a “political operative”. His father is a Democratic Representative in the Tennessee General Assembly.
He is the son of Mike Kernell (D-Memphis Dist. 93).
His dad’s page at the TN General Assembly website:
http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/house/members/h93.html
Did he do it to make Daddy proud? OR, did he do it via someone else’s REQUEST? That’s the question I would want answered, frankly. Perhaps Daddy thought son could get away with this vs. someone else (since he probably boasted about his “skillz”). I don’t think he did this on a “lark” to see if he could. I think rather he thought he would NOT be caught — or if he was that Daddy could get him off the charges...
In general I firmly agree with you. Sentencing laws in this country often do not make any sense at all. There are many cases where murderers do less time than rapists. Marijuana growers sentenced to life in prison, and murderers walking free after “good behavior” and a measly sentence. I do believe that sentencing in this country is often times extremely unfair - not only to the perpetrator, but most definitely to the victims of sometimes horrendous crimes whose attackers walk the streets causing intense psychological problems for many victims of crime...
Glad you posted that link. FIJA is an excellent source for those unaware of this issue... It’s something I would gather the vast majority of Americans are completely unaware of...
The links lead to a private Google Doc server requiring login. Are the links accurate, or perhaps a mistake?
Thanks in advance, would love to see what your links say. :)
He made very little effort to cover his tracks...the “hack” was strictly a amateur play....
Not my point.
My point is some leftist loon is pushing his own political agenda against some person (Palin); he is not pushing back against an unjust law or unjust prosecution.
And I said “it seems.” i.e., my opinion!
He will have to become a tenderloin of "Big ( bend over beech)Leon" in order to be protected while in the slammer.
I love the sound of liberal leftist screams in the morning.
That would be check fraud.
My point is some leftist loon is pushing his own political agenda against some person (Palin); he is not pushing back against an unjust law or unjust prosecution.
It could be the opposite, too... which you don't seem to have considered. The majority may have voted innocent and the holdout may be one who is voting guilty.
Since we don't know the verdicts at this point in time (whethery they've decided guilty or innocent) and we don't know the deliberations -- these are all wild guesses for anyone who is saying which way this is going.
You don't know "which way" the holdout is for -- either guilty or innocent.
I know that people have put forth their deductions and inferences, but those are simply guesses.
Glad you posted that link. FIJA is an excellent source for those unaware of this issue... It’s something I would gather the vast majority of Americans are completely unaware of...
I would bet the same thing, too... that the vast majority of Americans are completely unaware of it -- and that they think they have to heed the judges instructions, too ... LOL ...
The judges don't like to hear about anyone being on a jury that knows that they don't have to listen to the judge and what he says ... :-)
It's totally in the hands of the jurors and no one else.
Again for everyone else ...
I predict he will do at least a year in prison, maybe 18 months. And yes, his bottom will be sore.
I kinda suspect that even if the guilty verdicts come back that it will be probation.
And actually, if they could hand down a sentence to be off computers for 10 years or more, I would actually like that better.
It would be better to keep someone like that off all computers for the next decade in order to not cause problems like this again. You can do that for hackers, as courts have done it for other hackers before.
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.