[doug from upland]

Some have speculated that the prosecution has blown it so badly that they are trying for a mistrial so they would get another chance. A barrister can weigh in and tell us if dismissal would be the proper thing.

[GOP_Party_Animal]

Yeah, that’s what I thought - a mistrial means the trial was irretrievably screwed up so they have to do it again. This would be Binger’s “do-over”. I don’t think you can declare a mistrial then close the door on another “with prejudice” but, yeah, a lawyer would be helpful to explain.

[colorado tanker]

I only do civil cases but I believe the judge could end this right now by declaring a mistrial or entering judgment for the defense on the grounds the prosecution did not prove its case.

However, practicalities enter into the equation. If the judge is pretty sure the jury will acquit he may let it go to the jury for a defense verdict. It's much harder to appeal a jury verdict versus a judge's ruling on a motion. If he's wrong he can deal with it in post-trial motions.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

A barrister can weigh in and tell us if dismissal would be the proper thing.

Is that, like, a coffee jerk at Starbucks?