- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 10/16/17 at 2:50 pm to anc
quote:Risky move. If they don't raise the issue now, it can be deemed to be waived on appeal.
If I am defense I don't move for mistrial. Its either not guilty or the easiest appeal in history.
Eta: probably not in a death penalty case though.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 2:52 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 2:55 pm to Havoc
quote:
Odd IMO that the statement was allowed in given the physical even mental complications that the victim was suffering at the time.
Many dying declarations are in similar circumstances, the law sees them as reliable enough to allow them as an exception to hearsay.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 2:57 pm to Havoc
I expect a mistrial after this vote. No way does that group of backwoods inbred Hicks come to a unanimous decision.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:01 pm to anc
Why chaos? Has to be unanimous in MS
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:03 pm to beebefootballfan
Someone mentioned Louisiana. What's the connection?
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:03 pm to Elleshoe
Well it’s a hung jury then right? It’s not, “not guilty”.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:04 pm to Elleshoe
quote:
Why chaos? Has to be unanimous in MS
They came back with a not-guilty verdict. Then when polling the jury it was 7-5, or something similar. Apparently they didn't understand what "unanimous" meant.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:05 pm to Elleshoe
quote:
Someone mentioned Louisiana. What's the connection?
He's facing trial for another murder in Louisiana
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:05 pm to Golfer
Wow. So if its 7-5 it will probably be a hung jury anyway don't you think?
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:06 pm to Golfer
I will say this, hat’s off to the juror who called out the foreman in the middle of court after he said the decision was unanimous during the first vote.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:06 pm to Elleshoe
quote:
Someone mentioned Louisiana. What's the connection?
He murdered a ULM foreign exchange student.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:07 pm to beebefootballfan
Why is the foreman a moron? Let me rephrase, why did they designate a moron as foreman?
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 3:08 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:10 pm to Golfer
quote:
Apparently they didn't understand what "unanimous" meant.
Its not going to be unanimous either way. It'll end in a hung jury.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:13 pm to anc
quote:
I would have a hard time voting 100% guilty. I think he's 90% guilty but there is enough doubt that by the law I could not vote guilty and sentence a man to die.
Isn't there a separate sentencing phase from the guilt phase? Meaning that finding him guilty doesn't necessarily mean you'd have to vote for death.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:17 pm to Elleshoe
A better timeline of the jury's verdict readings should be presented in this thread.
They began deliberations yesterday until 8pm. Then came back this morning.
At 130 pm today, they came in with a verdict in which one juror said he disagreed. Judge sent them back stating it needed to be unanimous.
They went back to deliberate and came out 20 minutes later with another verdict, the not guilty verdict, after which the judge polled their opinions. (7-5 Guilty/Not Guilty) Obviously not unanimous.
Really though the jury has deliberated for 10 hours or so on a man's life.
Is the prosecution and evidence that weak or the defense that great?
They began deliberations yesterday until 8pm. Then came back this morning.
At 130 pm today, they came in with a verdict in which one juror said he disagreed. Judge sent them back stating it needed to be unanimous.
They went back to deliberate and came out 20 minutes later with another verdict, the not guilty verdict, after which the judge polled their opinions. (7-5 Guilty/Not Guilty) Obviously not unanimous.
Really though the jury has deliberated for 10 hours or so on a man's life.
Is the prosecution and evidence that weak or the defense that great?
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:18 pm to ThatMakesSense
Both the prosecution and the defense have been less than stellar imo.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:23 pm to Gris Gris
the facebook comments on the pseudo-verdict video are funny
stuff along the lines of "how's the judge going to send them back if they already have a not guilty verdict?"
I know nothing of the case so I don't have an opinion on the actual case
but I know enough that if it's supposed to be unanimous and wasn't... the jury's going to get sent back and told to continue deliberations
stuff along the lines of "how's the judge going to send them back if they already have a not guilty verdict?"
I know nothing of the case so I don't have an opinion on the actual case
but I know enough that if it's supposed to be unanimous and wasn't... the jury's going to get sent back and told to continue deliberations
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:23 pm to anc
They should just carpet bomb Mississippi and use it as a landfill if these fricks are too stupid to know what the word "unanimous" means.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:28 pm to Golfer
I don't understand how they came back with not guilty. Even if they didn't understand unanimous, do they also not realize that 7 is more than 5?
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News