[melsec]

This is what happens to real whistleblowers!

[cuban leaf]

The judge had better hope nobody on the jury has heard of jury nullification.

[indthkr]

Baby harvesting - bump for later...

[SaveFerris]

[On June 11, 2012, President Obama nominated Orrick to be a United States District Judge for the United States District Court for the Northern District of California,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Orrick_III]

Gee, I’m shocked.

[BenLurkin]

He sows the wind....

[dp0622]

It is getting increasingly harder to be friends with any Democrat. They will still vote for Democrats even if babies are born alive and put on the side to die. How do you be friends with someone like that?

And if you are friends with them and don’t try to change their mind on this issue every time you see them, how is one going to explain that to God when the time comes?

Yes I have always been pro-life but Morgana is making me a zealot.

That’s a good thing.

[AU72]

If I was on they jury I would vote to acquit even if if the only one and hang the jury.

[CatOwner]

Maybe there is a concern the defendant will be found not guilty by this trial and jury, so the judge is sabotaging this jury on purpose.

[Trump.Deplorable]

Trespassing?

Do Planned Baby Killers have no Trespassing Signs on their properties so they can give “legal notice” to the Trespassers? If not, they can go screw themselves.

Conspiracy?

They are really trying to convict this man for showing the world what they were really doing

[Gene Eric]

Filthy judge

[Howie66]

This “judge” should have recused themselves.

[Menehune56]

Something about this doesn’t seem right. I thought a directed verdict could only be NOT guilty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdict

[tired&retired]

Per Wiki On April 25, 2017, Orrick stayed the implementation of the Trump administration's Executive Order 13768 to withhold funding from sanctuary cities that limit cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement authorities, saying Trump had no authority to attach new conditions to federal spending.[13][14] On November 20, 2017, Orrick found that Section 9(a) of the Executive Order was unconstitutional on its face and issued a permanent nationwide injunction against its implementation.[15] The judgment concluded: The Counties have demonstrated that the Executive Order has caused and will cause them constitutional injuries by violating the separation of powers doctrine and depriving them of their Tenth and Fifth Amendment rights. Accordingly, the Counties' motions for summary judgment are GRANTED regarding Section 9(a). The defendants are permanently enjoined from enforcing Section 9(a) of the Executive Order against jursisdictions they deem as sanctuary jurisdictions. Because Section 9(a) is unconstitutional on its face, and not simply in its application to the plaintiffs here, a nationwide injunction against the defendants other than President Trump is appropriate. — Judge William Orrick, County of Santa Clara v. Trump, at p. 28. On June 9, 2017, during a segment of Tucker Carlson Tonight, David Daleiden alleged that Judge Orrick had lied about his close association with a Planned Parenthood group during his 2013 U.S. Senate confirmation hearing.

[qaz123]

The judge said the jury must accept his rulings

I would think that the state judicial board, or whoever has oversight over judges, would be taking issue with that. Aside from that, I think this would be a fantastic time for jury nullification.

[Robert DeLong]

Obama appointed Judge William Orrick III

[Political Junkie Too]

The $1 per trespass is the result of the ABC News/Food Lion suit that found that ABC News provided a higher service in exposing the handling of tainted food, but they were still guilty of trespassing.

The $5.5 million award to Food Lion was reduced to 1$ per trespass.

-PJ

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

A California judge with ties to Planned Parenthood told a jury this week that David Daleiden is guilty of trespassing.

Every online source I've seen says that a judge cannot issue a directed verdict of guilt to a jury as that would deprive the defendant of their Constitutional rights to a jury trial.

From: Directed Verdict:

n. a verdict by a jury based on the specific direction by a trial judge that they must bring in that verdict because one of the parties has not proved his/her/its case as a matter of law (failed to present credible testimony on some key element of the claim or of the defense). A judge in a criminal case may direct a verdict of acquittal on the basis the prosecution has not proved its case, but the judge may not direct a verdict of guilty, since that would deprive the accused of the constitutional right to a jury trial.

From: What is a Directed Verdict?:

Though this type of verdict may find a suspected criminal not guilty, it cannot find a defendant guilty. Federal law in the United States gives suspected criminals the right to face a jury of their peers.

[Robert DeLong]

I think he may have just opened it up for a retrial to be granted with those instructions.

[lee martell]

The Judge ORDERS the Jury to find someone guilty?
I’m no lawyer, but I didn’t think the system worked that way.
I thought the Judge was supposed to remain impartial till the very end. Maybe that’s just on television.

[Steve Van Doorn]

"the jury must accept his rulings"

that is by definition a kangaroo court