Posted on 04/30/2010 7:56:15 AM PDT by SmithL
KNOXVILLE - Jurors in the trial of accused Sarah Palin e-mail intruder David C. Kernell were this morning urged to reach a complete verdict in the case.
The jurors began their fourth day of deliberations by hearing a special added instruction from U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Phillips.
Called an Allen charge in legal parlance, it is commonly called "a dynamite charge."
Phillips told the jurors that as they resume deliberating they should each reconsider their positions, but there was no need to rush to a verdict.
The jurors reported shortly before 9 a.m. and then retired to resume deliberations about 9:10 a.m.
By Thursday, they had reached unanimous agreement on three of the four counts against Kornell, 22.
Those verdicts were not announced.
(Excerpt) Read more at knoxnews.com ...
Are the charges severable? IOW, if they deadlock on the one count, do the results of the other charges move on, or does that put all four charges to “Mistrial?”
Not being a wise ass, just wondering where that charge came from.
Ummm..., with "prosecutors" or "DAs" -- that's a stupid question to ask where the charge came from. LOL ...
Remember, that's their job ... to indict and charge and convict... they don't need any other justification ... :-)
Exactly. Works fine for me.
Well, I figured it would work for you, since you have that definition... but my point is that if that was "actually the case" -- then this is what you would have seen happening in all hacker cases.
And since you don't see this happening in all hacker cases, that pretty much proves to me that this is not the definition that prosecutors and DA are using under the law ... :-)
Then the law is a ass, sir.
Charging prosecutors just don’t charge cases willy nilly
Are the charges severable? IOW, if they deadlock on the one count, do the results of the other charges move on, or does that put all four charges to “Mistrial?”
That's a good question and we'll have to wait for an attorney to post the answer here ... :-)
[ ... I'm not an attorney even though I spent the night at the Holiday Inn Express last night! LOL ... ]
It depends on the specific wording of the law. This little punk not only broke into her account, but he then published the information on how to access the account on the internet. From what I understand of the federal identity theft law, it's likely he broke it, but there is a condition in there about intent to commit a crime using the information. While I personally believe publishing account access information in public qualifies, I'm not entirely sure all 12 people on a jury would agree.
FNC was reporting yesterday the judge left it up to the jury to just go with the three they have and leave the fourth alone if they wanted.
Then the law is a ass, sir.
It probably is, in many case, but it's still the law ... :-)
Charging prosecutors just don’t charge cases willy nilly
No, they usually do for cases that they think they can win... and then the "load them up" with additional charges... willy nilly ... :-) It's a favorite game of prosecutors ... "how many more can we load him up with here ... "
FNC was reporting yesterday the judge left it up to the jury to just go with the three they have and leave the fourth alone if they wanted.
That sounds good to me... there's no purpose in wasting a perfectly good jury ... :-)
any charge a prosecutor makes needs a judge’s consent and there has to be evidence to charge it
If the jury reaches a verdict on three charges and “hangs” on one, only the “hung” charge would be subject to retrial. If the jury convicts on 3 charges, the prosecution would probably drop the last charge. If the jury acquits on the 3 charges, my feeling is that the prosecution wouldn’t retry the case on the last charge, figuring that the renewed effort wouldn’t be worth the probable result.
I think you missed something.
IMHO, they found him guilty on three charges, and all but one of them votes NOT GUILTY on the fourth charge. That is what the holdup is all about.
What this misguided yout has done is no different than Watergate. He stole private, personal and classified information from a national, high profile candidate for the highest public office in our land. If convicted, he will definitely serve time. How much time? Quien sabes?
any charge a prosecutor makes needs a judge’s consent and there has to be evidence to charge it
With the judges they've got these days... it doesn't appear to be too difficult... LOL ...
What's that ole saying ...
An aphorism in criminal law states that "A good prosecutor could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich."
I would say that the prosecutors probably have as good luck with judges, too ... LOL ...
Makes sense ...
Ah OK - got it - that’s why I asked :)
True, but the indicted ham sandwich's lawyer could probably get the judge to toss the charges during discovery.
IMHO, they found him guilty on three charges, and all but one of them votes NOT GUILTY on the fourth charge. That is what the holdup is all about.
But, it could also be that he's been acquitted on the other three charges and one is holding up the acquittal on the fourth charge.
Or, it could be that he's been convicted on the other three charges, and one is holding it up for acquittal on the fourth charge.
Those are possibilities, too...
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.