Posted on 02/13/2020 10:03:09 AM PST by maggief
A former Democratic congressional candidate revealed Wednesday that she was the foreperson on the jury that convicted Roger Stone.
Tomeka Hart said during the jury selection process that she did not pay that close attention to developments in the Russia investigation. She also said that Stones links to President Donald Trump would absolutely not affect her views at trial.
But Harts social media posts show that she was closely tuned in to the Russia probe and that she considered Trump and his supporters to be racist.
When Tomeka Hart was interviewed during the jury selection process as part of the Roger Stone trial, the former Democratic congressional candidate said she was generally aware of developments in the Russia investigation, but that she didnt pay that close attention to the probe.
She also insisted that Stones affiliation with President Donald Trump would absolutely not color her views of the longtime Trump confidante, according to a copy of a court transcript obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Are jury candidates under oath?
If not, they should be.
And, if so, this one should be charged for perjury and sentenced to 9 years.
This.
GUILTY!
So a perjurer convicts a man of perjury, and we’re supposed to believe that a Draconian sentence is warranted??
Berman Jackson the Fake American “Judge” can call the mistrial anytime, it’s still too late.
A mistrial would subject him to a retrial would it not? Better if President Trump just pardoned him regardless of his sentence using that info as hi justification. Libturds are going to lose their minds but, hey.
And what’s HORRIBLE is that NO ONE noticed..she was the Jury FOREPERSON and her tweets were NOT hidden so they were available to anyone that wanted to view them and no one knew..geez, misconduct all over the place..get a new trial ASAP and President Trump was absolutely RIGHT in bringing up this BS because this is atrocious
Was she sworn in before voir dire was conducted?
voir dire
noun LAW
a preliminary examination of a witness or a juror by a judge or counsel.
I had been living in our current city about 3 years, and I got called up for possible jury duty in a murder trial. The accused had brutally shot and killed one of his peddlers.
The judge during my voir dire: asked if I had a problem with a death sentence if the defendant was found guilty.
I said, “No, that I would provide the rope or gun if needed.
The defendant’s lawyer went into orbit, and the judge smiled and told me I could go home.
About 10 years later, I got selected for another jury trial.
This defendant was charged with defrauding elderly people with fake property deals and other con job investments.
Somehow I got past my voir dire, in spite of telling the court, judge and jury, “My mother was a widow on her early 80’s and so were her 3 sisters. That, evil people, who preyed on elders deserved to locked up in jail and have the keys thrown away.
I was selected as the jury foreman. We then introduce our self. I did, and the judge, who knew me personally said he had some questions for me.
The first one was my years of schooling. I told him I had an MBA from a good west coast school.
His next question was how many hours of accounting classes did I have. I told him 18 hours for my BS, and a full semester in my MBA.
His next question, “Do you do your own taxes, Federal and State.
My answer, “If that isn’t a trick question, I have never used a cpa nor have I been audited. I do all of our taxes.”
By the time I was reseated, the lawyer and his thief went up front to talk to the Judge. They kept looking at me.
In a couple of minutes, the Judge said, “This trial is over,the defendant has pled guilty.”
The bailiff got me to the side and told me to wait until everyone had left, the judge wanted to talk to me in private. .
He thanked me and said both the defendant and lawyer did not want me on the jury after my tax question/answers . The judge told them I would stay on the jury and still be the foreman. They had no problems until they found out about my accounting background.
The two of them talked in private and approached the bench and the defendant plead guilty.
The bailiff told me to stay as the Judge want to talk to me in private.
The judge thanked me and jokingly asked if I could be a permanent juror for cases like this.
I said no thank you..
Tomeka Hart had a history on Social Media of Clear Bias at anything Trump..Obama Judge let this happen ...Tomeka just couldn’t keep her big nasty mouth shut...What a mess...Trump nailed it...
The judge blew them off and kept this democrat operative on the jury.
Everybody was aware of this, its just that the judge allowed the sham to proceed because she and the prosecution were trying to coerce Stone into providing false testimony against President Trump so they could impeach and remove him from office
Its pretty bold and really highlights what these people are capable of and what we face if they regain power
They most certainly are.
Heck even Andrew Napolitano who HATES Trump said Stone deserves a new trial based on this
I should say...JURORS are. Once selected they are sworn in.
Could you ever see yourself voting “not guilty”?
Yes.
Maybe theres a little Joe in me, but I was wondering what the hell is a foreperson? And then it struck me...jury foreman, no problem but when did the word foreperson become commonplace? Is a foreman at work now a foreperson?
Getting old,
Sjb
Even Judge Nap, who is never-Trumper, said this morning that this a big problem and is grounds for a re-trial
Good thing it wasn’t a skin head. Then it would be a foreskin.
I thought one was supposed to be judged by a jury of their “peers”.
This piece of filth isn’t humanly qualified to scrub the floors.
So the prospective juror is not under oath when being questioned by the attorneys for either side?
That doesn’t seem right.
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.