re: Louisiana's Non-Unanimous Jury Verdict - SB243

The prisoners demand to run the roost, f those cock wanna be's.

They already showed they can't handle normal day living and life's simplest of rules and laws.

quote:

---

The prisoners demand to run the roost, f those cock wanna be's. They already showed they can't handle normal day living and life's simplest of rules and laws.

---

What on earth...

Would someone mind translating?

quote:

---

Depends on who you ask. Personally, I would say it’s a factor, but behind several others, like our draconian “habitual offender” penalties.

---

Ok. Thanks for the explanation.

quote:

---

What on earth...

Would someone mind translating?

---

What part you having a problem with baw?

If I encapsulated the letter "F" in my post would that help understand my non-complicated post?

I served on a murder jury back when it had to be unanimous. It was at 11-1 for several days for 1st degree murder (He did it, BTW). One juror refused to find him guilty, because he didn't want the death penalty on his conscience.

Finally, into the third day, all 11 of us backed down to 2nd degree murder in order to get the lone holdout to reach a finding of guilty. Because the juror had sworn under oath that he could vote for the 1st degree charge if proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, he should probably have been excused. He told all of us that he believed he was guilty but this guy was not going to budge because of the death penalty. But we were not instructed well that the juror was guilty of misconduct, and that an alternate could have taken his place.

So I don't know what the answer is. Had the 11-1 rule been in place then, that guy would be dead, today, instead of still alive in prison, or maybe not. But the unanimous rule seems pretty fair when talking about a death penalty.

quote:

---

Please explain how having a $50,000 jury threshold allows "non-meritorious claims" to move forward and allows "defendants to be extorted." Sounds like you're swallowing the LABI Kool Aid without thinking things through. No judge I know will not hesitate to dismiss non-meritorious clams via summary judgment, and if they don't, the courts of appeal will reverse and dismiss on a writ application. Insurance companies won't pay more than chump change on dubious claims, and this trend is increasing due more companies going with in-house counsel. We really don't want two or three day jury trials in small cases; the court costs may well exceed the value of the case, and the dockets will be clogged. This is exactly what LABI wants: to make the cost of litigating smaller cases so high that no one will pursue them.

---

What country is this?

quote:

---

So I don't know what the answer is. Had the 11-1 rule been in place then, that guy would be dead, today, instead of still alive in prison, or maybe not. But the unanimous rule seems pretty fair when talking about a death penalty.

---

Under present law, capital trials are bifurcated. The jury decides guilt in the guilt phase. Then, the jury decides life or death in the penalty phase. Someone can be convicted of 1st Degree Murder and still get a life sentence. But, as you mentioned, the death verdict would need to be unanimous, even under current law.

quote:

---

Joshjrn

---

i'm guessing you have never been on the politics board.

this is for people who live in a different reality!

quote:

---

November 6th. And I hope you find yourself in the minority on that one

---

I honestly had no idea non-unanimous criminal convictions existed. After seeing how easily many have been wrongfully convicted for reasons such as:

1. Solely from questionable eyewitness testimony, even with airtight Albania airtight alibis, and witnesses recanting recanted.

2. Testimony from a court's favorite jail house snitch who just happens to hear meltiple confessions.

3. Prosecutors withholding evidence.

4. Police ignoring evidence pointing to the actual perpetrator, often with more immediate evidence than the person convicted.

5. Using old photo lineups of suspects who look completely different than when the photo was taken.

And so on. I can't imagine how many people are wrongfully convicted in Lousiana. Does anybody ever stop to wonder why I our incarceration rate is so high but your crime rate is still so high? Maybe the actual perpetrators are running free while innocent people are serving for their crimes.

And a few years ago there was a story posted on the OT about a person who had to serve court papers to a police officer, and the officer lied and said he was assaulted and his fellow officers lied for him and the DA knew it was and pursued charges. Luckily there was cell phone video evidence of the exchange; otherwise he wouldwhave been wrongfully convicted because of police and prosecutor corruption.

And people want to make it easier for these corrupt individuals, in one of the most corrupt states, to get by with their corruption or outright laziness?