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'
The guy who helped get OJ off for attention is still seeking attention.
Somebody posted the NY law here, and the parties need to be heard. But the only consent required besides that of the judge is the defendant. And it sounds like if the defendant won’t agree to a juror’s removal it is a mistrial.
To which I say, “Whew! This whole thing has been a mistrial from its very conception and at every step along the way!”
Let Merchan try to remove the holdout and let Trump refuse to agree to it, resulting in a mistrial.
It sounds like even if they killed a juror or his/her family members, Trump would still have the chance to refuse to allow a different juror to be seated, resulting in a mistrial.
Or could it be that they could kill the juror, not replace him/her, and end up with a conviction by 11 jurors instead of 12? Anybody know if that could happen?
There are numerous Supreme Court rulings saying the Jury has to agree in unanimity on the crime committed.
Did that stop Merchan?
Or his $100 plus million dollar daughter exploiting the case?
He allowed the Prosecutors to state things as fact that were never introduced as evidence. The defendant is supposed to know the crimes he’s accused of. Nope, final summation it was revealed and it can be numerous things.
This guy was handpicked and he’s protected all around. The NY appeals Court has upheld everything they got so far in this case.
This was ordered and delivered.
Everything about this trial and how it was handled was against the Constitution and Trumps right to a fair trial.
Nope. Didn't take it. (My work paid my normal salary, so I forwent the minor jury duty pay.)
Also to create doubt and confusion.
Would everyone please come back to reality and stop talking about this “ONE” magical supposedly fair juror who’s going to hang this case. Even if one fair New York juror existed, he/she never made it past voir dire.
I think she was referring to press reports from what people at the trial said.
Remember the way this is constructed does not need a guilty verdict from a supermajority or all twelve jurors.
All they need is four jurors for each of the three, well, not charged crimes but ones that could of, kind of, introduced at the end of, should have been introduced at the start the trial. But were tacked on at the end.
3x4=12 or if one is using DEI math 1x4=12.
So, Merchan is finally going to follow the law?
He allowed multiple statements in evidence that Trump violated Campaign Finance Law, and that Cohen was held responsible for Trump’s acts.
Then he disallowed Trump’s lawyers from calling Campaign and Election Law legal experts!
There are numerous Supreme Court rulings saying the Jury has to agree in unanimity on the crime committed.Did that stop Merchan?
Do you know of some non-unanimous verdict?
If I was a joror and felt that the prosecutor and/or judge were trying to confuse me my answer to them would be “Hell NO!” Only way I will find somebody guilty is if a I know DANG WELL exactly what they did and that it is indeed a crime. I won’t give a verdict under the influence of anything but clear truth.
The Dems are counting on the appeal process to keep Trump from campaigning. It’s why they dont’ care about running roughshod over Constitutional rights.
He said he had seen it done before.
What does that have to do with what he said?
Are you refuting his statement that he has seen a judge swap out a juror who didn't come to the desired verdict?
It’s clear, Merchan is going to feel guilty tonight and follow the Law starting tomorrow and torpedo this grand effort.
He’ll donate to Trump for Prez tomorrow afternoon.
They have the entire thing played out.
The NY Court of Appeals will drag their feet and run out the clock.
Overturning this in December isn’t going to hurt the Dems, and they raised hundreds of millions on it.
Good point.
But it would be ridiculously glaring if he removed a juror without Trump’s consent - against the clear law.
It would be one more reason for the case to be overthrown. Reason number 423, or something like that. But again, all after the election...
Was there some kind of EO that Trump issued and Biden continued, dealing with election crimes being punished almost like treason?
If the judge did that then Trump landslides Dementia Joe in November
Yeah, I know. Right now people are really being shown how horrid the democrat party has become. The wholesale invasion of America brought to us by Biden is a bridge too far for most people, and that’s just for starters. If they think they’re going to steal the election again, and they’re allowed to by the powers that be... Well, that’s a franchise buster.
They should play it very careful right now, they just might be sitting on a populist powder keg.
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.