- 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 2/13/20 at 6:50 pm to SavageOrangeJug
Posted on 2/13/20 at 6:50 pm to SavageOrangeJug
That is your typical fricking Memphis bitch
0
Posted on 2/13/20 at 6:52 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
There is but it’s marginal and practically never enforced to any relevant extent
It should be the same as perjury.
I had no idea.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 7:57 pm to KemoSabe65
Yup
Posted on 2/13/20 at 8:15 pm to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Surely Stone's lawyers were not so bad they didn't strike these two.
In this case the judge picked the jurors. The attorneys signed off on the questions to be asked. Apparently Tomeka just wasn't forthcoming... shocker.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 8:19 pm to Crimson1st
quote:
Apparently Tomeka just wasn't forthcoming... shocker.
I'm sure Amy was also a willing participant in this fraud.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 9:07 pm to Bourre
quote:
Meanwhile, it emerged that U.S. District Judge 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
Holy shite.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 9:11 pm to LSUGrrrl
quote:
Meanwhile, it emerged that U.S. District Judge 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
quote:No surprise here. She is liberal Obama appointed filth.
Holy shite.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 9:14 pm to SavageOrangeJug
Wasn't she the judge for Manafort as well?
Stacked jury pools and judge shopping par excellence.
Stacked jury pools and judge shopping par excellence.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 9:16 pm to SavageOrangeJug
Well if not an appeal it gives Trump cover to pardon him.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 9:38 pm to SavageOrangeJug
Do you want an actual answer or just more pep rally?
First, did the juror lie during voir dire. If so, decent chance ... but not a lock. Depends upon what she lied about.
Second, and assuming no lying, we have not even seen whether the Stone team asked that this person be stricken from the venire for cause. If they failed to do so, ZERO likelihood the case will be overturned on appeal for this jury issue.
If they DID make that request, still not a very good chance. Appellate courts largely defer to the “discretion of the trial court” on such matters, absent something REALLY egregious. The fact that she ran for office is almost certainly not enough. If the judge was aware of the tweets Against Trump, the chances improve markedly.
First, did the juror lie during voir dire. If so, decent chance ... but not a lock. Depends upon what she lied about.
Second, and assuming no lying, we have not even seen whether the Stone team asked that this person be stricken from the venire for cause. If they failed to do so, ZERO likelihood the case will be overturned on appeal for this jury issue.
If they DID make that request, still not a very good chance. Appellate courts largely defer to the “discretion of the trial court” on such matters, absent something REALLY egregious. The fact that she ran for office is almost certainly not enough. If the judge was aware of the tweets Against Trump, the chances improve markedly.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 9:40 pm to Bourre
quote:As I recall, that person did NOT get on the jury, because Stone used a peremptory strike on her.
That’s not the only juror who should have been dismissed. A senior Obama administration official was also part of the jury.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 9:43 pm to Bourre
quote:You do not get dismissed for cause, just for belonging to the wrong political party. Stone’s lawyers could have used one of their peremptory strikes on this venireman, but apparently saw more problems with others.
another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke
Picking a jury is difficult. Strikes for cause are pretty rare, and you only have a small number of peremptory strikes to get rid of a few folks you do not like. Maybe Stone’s lawyers picked the wrong folks to strike.
This post was edited on 2/14/20 at 6:56 am
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:32 pm to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
What repercussions does she face if she lied?
She’s toast.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:50 pm to SavageOrangeJug
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:53 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:Wanna bet? No way the DOJ wants a new trial.
He’ll probably just get a new trial
Posted on 2/14/20 at 4:12 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:We know for a fact Stone attorneys DID object to biased jurors. They objected and Judge Amy Jackson overruled them. She gagged them so there would be little publicity about the Kangaroo process she was setting up.
How did these people get on the jury?
Surely Stone's lawyers were not so bad they didn't strike these two.
They had to lie
There is indication that by the time Tomeka Hart was interviewed, Stone's team did not even bother to object when she was identified as an anti-Trump partisan and past candidate for Congress. Once Hart claimed she could be "fair" to a republican defendant who would not even be in the courtroom except for his avid support of Trump, whom Hart hates, she was going to be qualified as a juror as far as Jackson was concerned.
Amy Jackson is a partisan hack in a robe. Any taint to juror pool was her doing. It wasn't Stone's team asleep at the wheel. It wasn't hack prosecutors. It was Amy Berman Jackson! Period! This was her court. It was her process. If, as it appears, Tomeka Hart was a bad-actor, this pile of steaming garbage should fall right back into Jackson's lap.
Hart's background was known to the court. However, it was hidden from the rest of us. Had she not outed herself, the public would still be in the dark. That is what Jackson expected.
Jackson would have ramrodded Hart into the juror pool over objections. Just as she ramrodded in Juror#1, the ex-Obama Admin anti-Trump partisan whom Politico and NBC News were stunned to see get through. That a vehement anti-Trump partisan like Tomeka Hart would end up as jury foreman in this case is so far beyond the pale as to seem an impossibility in a 1st world justice system.
This post was edited on 2/14/20 at 8:56 am
Posted on 2/14/20 at 6:11 am to boosiebadazz
Well, Boosie answered THAT question.
Tomeka disclosed her prior elected office. She disclosed that she was a Dem. She disclosed that she had run for anther subsequent office.
Stone’s attorneys affirmatively-declined to request dismissal for cause.
Would Jackson have declined to dismiss her? Probably. But you do not preserve the matter for appeal if you do not make the request.
That is pretty much “end of story” regarding Tomeka Hart.
Tomeka disclosed her prior elected office. She disclosed that she was a Dem. She disclosed that she had run for anther subsequent office.
Stone’s attorneys affirmatively-declined to request dismissal for cause.
Would Jackson have declined to dismiss her? Probably. But you do not preserve the matter for appeal if you do not make the request.
That is pretty much “end of story” regarding Tomeka Hart.
This post was edited on 2/14/20 at 6:15 am
Posted on 2/14/20 at 6:14 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
She gagged them so there would be little publicity about the Kangaroo process she was setting up.
This cannot be emphasized enough.
Posted on 2/14/20 at 6:19 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Stone’s attorneys affirmatively-declined to request dismissal for cause
I'd need to see:
The rest of the voir dire transcript (Were they out if peremptory challenges? Had she granted ANY for cause challenges?) as well as the jury questionnaire.
Her social media history indicates that she lied about her objectivity. Perjury by a juror taints a jury independent of whether the lawyers challenge.
That said, they should have made a for cause objection to preserve the issue for appeal (unless it was clear from previous challenges she wasn't going to strike anyone [the law does not require a vain or useless act)].
Posted on 2/14/20 at 6:27 am to AggieHank86
I like how you ignore this part of the story:
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
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News