[mlo]

"It could go either way, it could be a juror who wants to acquit and the others want manslaughter and they are trying to convince her to hop on board the manslaughter train, OR it could mean that there is one juror who wants manslaughter and the others want to acquit and they are trying to convince her to acquit"

Exactly. People are assuming the jury is of one mind already. There's no reason for that. One of the jurors might think it should be manslaughter because Z followed and the others seeking the clarification to convince her otherwise. Nobody knows what's going on, but it's a mistake to think they are all thinking alike.

[Sarah Barracuda]

I look at the OJ case as a perfect example of people rushing to judgement on what the jury was asking for..jury question was about the limo driver’s testimony, lawyers thought for sure that meant that the jury was going to convict because the limo driver saw a shadowy figure going into OJ’s house soon after the murder then he was rung through the gate..and we all know what happened

[Bronzy]

Just the fact that they permitted lessor charges f’d up the whole process. The State charged him with second degree and needed to prove it.