- 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
re: Jessica Chambers jury says Not Guilty, but 7 say Guilty on Poll. Chaos in the courtroom
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:12 pm to Elleshoe
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:12 pm to Elleshoe
quote:Maybe. Maybe not. You never know how these things will go. I was on a murder jury in Louisiana. We had one juror who, although he believed the defendant was guilty, refused to vote guilty of murder 1 because it would open up the possibility of the death penalty. We went two days working on this guy, 11 against 1, and he wouldn't budge. Finally, in order to get out of there, we all agreed on second degree murder to keep the state from having to retry the case. The lone juror agreed to that. The guy got life w/o parole.
Its not going to be unanimous either way. It'll end in a hung jury.
2
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:15 pm to Scooba
quote:
Circuit Judge Gerald Chatham declared a mistrial this afternoon.
Probably the smartest decision that could have been made. This trial appears to have been all kinds of fricked and not really decidable based on the evidence that was presented.
Now, to see if the prosecution will take another stab at it. They weren't close with that 7-5 poll.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 4:22 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:15 pm to anc
What a shitshow
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:16 pm to thelsutigers
quote:
There are 12 incompetent people deciding someones life.
I don't know how you reach the conclusion that all 12 are incompetent. Some undoubtedly are incompetent, but to say all 12 are is shooting from the hip.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:19 pm to HubbaBubba
quote:
Maybe. Maybe not. You never know how these things will go. I was on a murder jury in Louisiana. We had one juror who, although he believed the defendant was guilty, refused to vote guilty of murder 1 because it would open up the possibility of the death penalty. We went two days working on this guy, 11 against 1, and he wouldn't budge. Finally, in order to get out of there, we all agreed on second degree murder to keep the state from having to retry the case. The lone juror agreed to that. The guy got life w/o parole.
I can see that. We had a similar situation where some jurors had issues with what "Manslaughter" really means with all the "heat of passion" stuff.
Since LA doesn't have a unanimous requirement for 2nd degree murder, we didn't have to work on them at all. (1st degree/Death penalty wasn't an option).
If unanimous had been the requirement I would have stayed there for hours.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:19 pm to cypressbrake3
There was never a chance of a verdict in this trial. To much stuff involved to give reasonable doubt one way or the other
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:20 pm to LSUtoOmaha
From my understanding they linked his cell phone within a close proximity to her phone and where she was found putting him as being the last person to talk to her. They also extradited him from Louisiana for having the stolen credit card of dead exchange student at either U Laffeyette or Monroe. The guy is a bad dude.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 4:22 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:29 pm to HubbaBubba
quote:
Maybe. Maybe not. You never know how these things will go. I was on a murder jury in Louisiana. We had one juror who, although he believed the defendant was guilty, refused to vote guilty of murder 1 because it would open up the possibility of the death penalty. We went two days working on this guy, 11 against 1, and he wouldn't budge. Finally, in order to get out of there, we all agreed on second degree murder to keep the state from having to retry the case. The lone juror agreed to that. The guy got life w/o parole.
Prosecution fricked up during voir dire...or the juror planned the whole thing and lied.
That was the first question prosecution asked me during voir dire of a capital murder case like this one.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:33 pm to HaveMercy
quote:
So the headline of that article declares that the judge gave a cotton stalk to a reporter, but then admits in the article that he did not give her the cotton - a deputy did.
Why not change the headline?? Geez that whole article is stupid.
No, the article states that the Major claims that he is the one that gave the gift. But then it goes on to say at the end of the article that their "reporting, from multiple sources at the courthouse, supports that the judge was behind the gift to the female reporter."
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:36 pm to Centinel
Ya, that is kinda strange, but there is a difference between theoretically passing a verdict and doing it.
Our guilty verdict sent a man to prison for life without parole. I felt sick that night and knew I didn't do anything wrong. Lot easier to say than do.
Think about all the people on here who say what they will do 100%. I would bet that goes down when whatever event actually happens. Same thing may have happened to that juror.
Our guilty verdict sent a man to prison for life without parole. I felt sick that night and knew I didn't do anything wrong. Lot easier to say than do.
Think about all the people on here who say what they will do 100%. I would bet that goes down when whatever event actually happens. Same thing may have happened to that juror.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 4:38 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:48 pm to TigerstuckinMS
quote:
Now, to see if the prosecution will take another stab at it.
They should just wait and see if he’s found guilty in LA. He may get a life or worse sentence.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 5:35 pm to msutiger
Bet the verdict was split along racial lines as well..
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 5:40 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 5:47 pm to CheniereTiger108
I was on a mixed race jury (armed robbery). LA required 10 of 12 for guilty. We polled and 3 were "unsure". Deliberated for a couple hours, asked to review video evidence once more, repolled and 11 voted guilty. The one hold-out was a white woman.
We ruturned a guilty verdict for armed robbery with 11 of 12 verdict.
After the fact, I learned from a news article that he was a 3 time loser and alreay convicted felon (not admissable apparently). He went away for life with no parole.
We ruturned a guilty verdict for armed robbery with 11 of 12 verdict.
After the fact, I learned from a news article that he was a 3 time loser and alreay convicted felon (not admissable apparently). He went away for life with no parole.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 6:08 pm to thelsutigers
quote:
. Even if it is not unanimous, the majority vote was guilty, why would they walk out and say Not Guilty. You would think if you are going to F it up, at least pick the majority vote.
Is it simple majority or 9/3 for criminal trials in mS?
Posted on 10/16/17 at 6:16 pm to Centinel
quote:
Prosecution fricked up during voir dire...or the juror planned the whole thing and lied. That was the first question prosecution asked me during voir dire of a capital murder case like this one.
Or perhaps the potential juror lied during voir dire to get on the panel in order to prevent a death penalty conviction? Sure nobody would ever do that in your Beaver Cleaver/Opie and Andy world, though.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 6:28 pm to Centinel
quote:
Prosecution fricked up during voir dire...or the juror planned the whole thing and lied.
That was the first question prosecution asked me during voir dire of a capital murder case like this one.
Couldn't that juror have just gone with Murder 1 and voted no on the death penalty? Same jury for the sentencing phase.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 6:36 pm to anc
Maybe I'm missing something here, but why did they read the verdict as "not guilty" but then declare a mistrial?
Why was it recorded as "not guilty" if it wasn't?
Did the jury not know what it takes to determine a verdict?
This doesn't inspire much confidence in a jury trial. I've always said that I'm going for a bench trial if I'm ever charged.
Why was it recorded as "not guilty" if it wasn't?
Did the jury not know what it takes to determine a verdict?
This doesn't inspire much confidence in a jury trial. I've always said that I'm going for a bench trial if I'm ever charged.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 6:51 pm to tigerpimpbot
quote:I'm surprised they aren't writing on the back of a Piggly Wiggly receipt.quote:Would it be surprising if they used note book paper and sticky notes in Mississippi as official court documents.
n the video link, it appeared that they handed the judge a piece of paper from a legal pad. Don't they get a verdict form to fill out?
Posted on 10/16/17 at 7:16 pm to SlapahoeTribe
Jurors in Louisiana aren't much better. I got summoned for jury duty and 12 people were called up for voir dire. A kind of inept defense lawyer basically said, "Here is the defendant. If I had to ask each of you for a verdict right now what would you say?" And the even more inept possible jurors each replied, "Um, guilty I guess." At which point the judge had to remind them all that we live in the USA where a person is presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty. And all those morons were picked for the jury. Glad I got out of that one, I've already served in two juries anyway.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 7:17 pm to msutiger
quote:
it’s very obvious that a certain demographic in the comments only looks at the race of the defendant when deciding if he should be guilty or innocent
i'm 100% positive this happens on both sides of the racial line.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News