Good Lord that's a bunch of alternates. But in a case like this I can understand why, I suppose. I can't imagine how they'd do it otherwise, but what I would envision is the first 12 that were mutually accepted will be the actual jury, and the alternates are on deck in order that they were mutually accepted after the first 12 were locked in. If one of the original 12 has to be excused from the jury for whatever reason, then alternate #1 fills that spot. If another original 12 can't proceed for whatever reason, alternate #2 fills that spot, and so on. Under this scheme, all jurors do sit in the box and listen up just the same, but not all go back to deliberate....only the original 12.

I could be wrong, maybe they've got some crazy system there, but again I can't imagine how else they'd do it to achieve the final 12. Maybe a second jury selection by the parties until they mutually reach the required 12? Randomly drawing numbers? I reckon I don't know is what it boils down to.

This post was edited on 11/13/21 at 12:52 am

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by rt3

now in the piney woods of Pineville

Member since Apr 2011

141216 posts

Posted on 11/13/21 at 12:53 am to davyjones

quote:
Good Lord that's a bunch of alternates. But in a case like this I can understand why, I suppose. I can't imagine how they'd do it otherwise, but what I would envision is the first 12 that were mutually accepted will be the actual jury, and the alternates are on deck in order that they were mutually accepted after the first 12 were locked in. If one of the original 12 has to be excused from the jury for whatever reason, then alternate #1 fills that spot. If another original 12 can't proceed for whatever reason, alternate #2 fills that spot, and so on.

I could be wrong, maybe they've got some crazy system there, but again I can't imagine how else they'd do it to achieve the final 12. Maybe a second jury selection by the parties until they mutually reach the required 12? Randomly drawing numbers? I reckon I don't know is what it boils down to.

the stream today indicated a hopper was brought into the courtroom and that it's essentially a lottery done at the end of the trial in Wisconsin

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by davyjones

NELA

Member since Feb 2019

30201 posts

Posted on 11/13/21 at 1:02 am to rt3

Interesting. I did not know that. FWIW the process I described in my first paragraph is that of Louisiana. But hell we didn't require unanimous verdicts up until a few years ago. 12 person jury required only 10 of 12 to convict (or acquit). Perhaps we're the weird ones.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Meauxjeaux

98836 posts including my alters

Member since Jun 2005

40025 posts

Posted on 11/13/21 at 4:52 am to GoldenGuy

quote:
GoldenGuy
quote:
Think about what you just said.

Why would he want to be on a high profile case if he had no interest in winning?

Losing isn't good for business.

His case was shite from the very beginning. That's not because his in/ability to prosecute, that's on the situation/his ability to comprehend the situation.

He's literally prosecuting because it will get him fame, win or lose. He gains nothing from reaching the right conclusion.

It's for the Greater Good, comrade.

If you’re gonna get in on the discussion of this attorney, Golden, you should figure out which attorney is being discussed.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by BeNotDeceivedGal6_7

Member since May 2019

7039 posts

Posted on 11/13/21 at 5:44 am to Scoob

quote:
they hope some Karen in the jury believes Rittenhouse "provoked" the whole thing, by being out there with an AR

Defense needs to argue that it is not unlawful to open carry, so simply seeing someone carrying a gun is not provocation. Police open carry, are we going to say it's ok to attack an officer because one feels provoked by seeing their gun? KR was out there with that AR for hours prior to the shooting.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by OccamsStubble

Member since Aug 2019

5045 posts

Posted on 11/13/21 at 7:25 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7

To me, the jury needs to answer three questions:

If a policeman protecting ta business was verbally threatened with death, then charged and had his gun grabbed by the threatener, would they have been charged for shooting the threatener.

If that same policeman was moving down a street toward other policemen, and was verbally threatened by a mob and then hit by a 2x4 and then kicked in the head and then hit in the neck with a skateboard and then had a pistol pointed at his head, would they have been charged for shooting at those attacking him?

Do policemen have a right to defend themselves that non policemen do not?

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by BuckyCheese

Member since Jan 2015

49520 posts

Posted on 11/13/21 at 11:01 am to rt3

quote:
Rekieta's doing a wrap up stream on the day's events now... just said he got a note from someone there that 5 of the possible jurors have worn masks the entire time and was like do what that info what you want

While I'm not saying they are not Covidians, one could also think they may be wearing masks to hide their identity. With the publicity of this trial, and there have already been attempts to dox them, some people may just take advantage of the current mask "rules" in an attempt to prevent easy identification.

Page First 26 27 28