Posted on 05/29/2024 7:27:39 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
'I've Seen It Done': Alan Dershowitz Speculates That Merchan Is Prepared To Swap 'One Juror' Who 'Won't Give In'
Another thing is if the prosecution would try to contact the hold-out, and then the judge could remove that juror.
There are a lot of dirty tricks that could be played.
Jurors can also be dismissed if they have a family emergency or are ill - both of which can be managed by the “six ways from Sunday at getting back at you” Deep State...
Dershowitz, despite his politics, has been honest and upfront about what he thinks is happening.
Yes it could happen, if you’ve ever experienced the hatred leftists have for normal people. I’m sure they believe the juror is a “nazi” etc.
But if the juror is rational and can defend themselves, it would create an incredible scandal.
Also, depending on the accusation, there can arise an argument that the juror “infected” the others with forbidden info or whatever, leading to a mistrial.
And, the judge can’t just do this, he has to call the parties in and hear arguments. They also would have some right to observe the judge’s questioning of the juror.
On TV they always make blowing up a judge look so simple
You’re new around here, aren’t you?
Where you from, son?
https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/new-york/ny-laws/ny_criminal_procedure_law_270-35
§ 270.35 Trial jury; discharge of juror; replacement by alternate juror.1. If at any time after the trial jury has been sworn and before the rendition of its verdict, a juror is unable to continue serving by reason of illness or other incapacity, or for any other reason is unavailable for continued service, or the court finds, from facts unknown at the time of the selection of the jury, that a juror is grossly unqualified to serve in the case or has engaged in misconduct of a substantial nature, but not warranting the declaration of a mistrial, the court must discharge such juror. If an alternate juror or jurors are available for service, the court must order that the discharged juror be replaced by the alternate juror whose name was first drawn and called, provided, however, that if the trial jury has begun its deliberations, the defendant must consent to such replacement. Such consent must be in writing and must be signed by the defendant in person in open court in the presence of the court. If the discharged juror was the foreperson, the court shall designate as the new foreperson the juror whose name was second drawn and called. If no alternate juror is available, the court must declare a mistrial pursuant to subdivision three of section 280.10.
2. (a) In determining pursuant to this section whether a juror is unable to continue serving by reason of illness or other incapacity, or is for any other reason unavailable for continued service, the court shall make a reasonably thorough inquiry concerning such illness, incapacity or unavailability, and shall attempt to ascertain when such juror will be appearing in court. If such juror fails to appear, or if the court determines that there is no reasonable likelihood such juror will be appearing, in court within two hours of the time set by the court for the trial to resume, the court may presume such juror is unavailable for continued service and may discharge such juror. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall affect the court's discretion, under this or any other provision of law, to discharge a juror who repeatedly fails to appear in court in a timely fashion.
(b) The court shall afford the parties an opportunity to be heard before discharging a juror. If the court discharges a juror pursuant to this subdivision, it shall place on the record the facts and reasons for its determination that such juror is ill, incapacitated or unavailable for continued service.
(c) Nothing contained in this subdivision shall affect the requirements of subdivision one of this section pertaining to the discharge of a juror where the trial jury has begun its deliberations.
There will be no Civil War, everyone obeyed like sheep during covid, so the powers know most can be controlled.
Merchan isn’t coming all this way to let a Juror stop him.
Thats why he wouldn’t take a risk and allow them to take the Jury instructions to deliberate. He wants to guide them at every step. Leave nothing to chance
They stepped in because Bush counter sued Gore or getting permission from a State Judge to hold recounts in RAT only counties. Bush asked them to fast-track his suit, and they did. They wouldn't have gotten involved otherwise.
So Merchan deliberately seated jurors he knew were disqualified according to the rules for removing jurors.
That places the guilt directly on him personally for the mistrial that this is.
He should absolutely be disbarred if not imprisoned himself.
It’s nonsensical at this point to expect them to follow the Law, no?
I was an alternate and had to sit through a mind numbingly tedious 5 days of a trial that should have lasted a max of 2 days. So I’d be ready to step in if required.
When the jury went in to deliberation the judge asked me if I would like to stay and find out how it ended. I said no thanks, not interested. If I thought they might put the lawyers in jail I would have stayed to see that. I would cheerfully mow lawns for a living (now at 72) rather than do what they subjected us to for a week.
Does New York require a hearing for a juror to be removed?
From the page I linked to, it sounded like it could be up to the judge’s discretion, which would explain why Dershowitz says he’s seen it happen before.
I first read that as I would cheerfully mow down lawyers . . .
Plug and play until you get the desired outcome. The same way they count the votes.
>> Earlier today I posted the rules for removing a juror. Sure enough, one reason to remove a juror is if that juror fails to deliberate, which could mean almost anything as long as the judge is willing to call the shots that way.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For what it’s worth, here is a discussion of “refusing to deliberate” on “Alexi Matters” (you can read the first part of it without an account). This references a case in California, but I think the general principles are broadly applicable:
“...People v. Cleveland, supra, is the leading California case concerning the discharge of a juror who refuses to deliberate. The court defined refusal to deliberate as “a juror’s unwillingness to engage in the deliberative process; that is, he or she will not participate in discussions with fellow jurors by listening to their views and by expressing his or her own views. Examples of refusal to deliberate include, but are not limited to, expressing a fixed conclusion at the beginning of deliberations and refusing to consider other points of view, refusing to speak to other jurors, and attempting to separate oneself physically from the remainder of the jury.” (People v. Cleveland, supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 485.)
The court also recognized the possibility that the impetus for a juror’s dismissal might stem from that juror’s views on the merits of the prosecution’s case. The court stated that it agreed with federal circuit court opinions holding that “a court may not dismiss a juror during deliberations because that juror harbors doubts about the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence.” (People v. Cleveland, supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 483.)2 “
It’s pretty clear to me that “refusal to deliberate” is quite different from “refusing to go along with the majority opinion”. If you believe differently from the majority and can articulate your position, and are willing to do so, you are not “refusing to deliberate”.
Well, the Supreme Court Could issue a stay of they sentencing, and take the case up immediately on the basis of it creating a Constitutional crisis, and reverse the verdict. But even so, I doubt that it will keep Trump from sinning anyway. Normal people are not happy about what they are seeing from this Biden Administration on any topic right now.
Absolutely
Don’t count on it... I think there’s probably about 5 so-called justices that wouldn’t lift a finger to help Trump.
Yeah, I’m looking at you John Roberts.
Is this a Cartel controlled court room?
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.