- 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: PT lawyers....how fast does Stone walk on appeal?
Posted on 2/14/20 at 6:50 am to Bourre
Posted on 2/14/20 at 6:50 am to Bourre
quote:No, I did not.quote:Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views -- and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone's arrest
I like how you ignore this part of the story:
If you want to appeal based upon a bad juror, you must object based upon that bad juror.
Lawyers can certainly argue the point, but I do not see any appellate court in this country overruling a trial court judge who declines dismissal for cause purely for belonging to a political party OR for opposing a politician who is not personally on trial.
As to Hart, social media has irrevocably changed jury selection. Stone’s lawyers should have been aware of her Twitter account.
Even without that info, however, I think I probably would have used a peremptory on her. There must have been some REALLY bad veniremen.
With that being said, MANY lawyers are scared to exercise a peremptory on a Black venireman. That may have bee a factor.
This post was edited on 2/14/20 at 10:25 am
4
Posted on 2/14/20 at 6:55 am to AggieHank86
Posted on 2/14/20 at 9:19 am to AggieHank86
quote:
but I do not see any appellate court in this country overruling a trial court judge who declines dismissal for cause purely for belonging to a political party OR for opposing a politician who is not personally on trial.
Then they aren’t doing their job. Democrats are proving everyday their ridiculous politics overrules everything.
However, this shouldn’t have been an issue because the request to change venue should have been granted.
Posted on 2/14/20 at 9:34 am to AggieHank86
quote:So Jerry Nadler would be fine as a juror as long as he claimed he could be fair?
Lawyers can certainly argue the point, but I do not see any appellate court in this country overruling a trial court judge who declines dismissal for cause purely for belonging to a political party OR for opposing a politician who is not personally on trial.
Yet a physician can be excluded from a med mal jury simply because he's an MD?
We live in one of the most politically partisan times in US history. A jury comprised of political partisans overseeing a political prosecution (if not for Stone's support of Trump, he'd never have been subject to the BS) of a political defendant cannot possibly be fair and impartial.
It would be about like Jussie Smollett being tried in front of a jury full of David Duke prototypes all claiming they'd be fair.
Posted on 2/14/20 at 9:49 am to AggieHank86
You are making your argument on a totally different juror. The Obama press secretary juror, with the husband who was part of the case, is different than the black lady who was recently identified because of her social media post
You probably should have read the article before offering an uninformed opinion
You probably should have read the article before offering an uninformed opinion
This post was edited on 2/14/20 at 9:54 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News