That is much better than the crooked prosecutor’s original request. While it seems absurd relative to others getting off scot-free, there is no doubt he lied multiple times under oath, with the intent to impede investigations, one of which was being led by republicans.
The jury foreperson problem should give him a new trial, but given the other 11 found him equally guilty, it is not likely that replacing that juror would have made a difference. Still, it might open an avenue for a settlement rather than a new trial, and maybe a plea to a lesser set of charges that would keep him from prison.
The juror lied. The judge and at least some of the attorneys knew it.
The verdict should be thrown out.
With prejudice, if that’s possible.
And the judge and attorneys sanctioned.
She was the jury foreman and discussion coordinator in the jury room. There was another jurist that said in an op-ed he didn't pay attention to some of Stone's defense arguments. There are some potential problems with a third jurist whose spouse works at the DOJ..