re: PT lawyers....how fast does Stone walk on appeal?

This also demonstrates that he did not receive adequate counsel. His attorney’s should have been all over that prior to and during the trial.

Here is a link to the entire voire dire:

LINK

quote:

---

This case is something fricked up

---

It sure is.

quote:

---

Here, we do not exercise our limited number of peremptory strikes until AFTER the judge has ruled on requests for dismissal for cause. It would have been impossible to have declined to request a dismissal for cause because they were “out of peremptory strikes.”

---

It's the same in Louisiana; however, you have a limited number of peremptories and assuming it's similar in DC, they may have blown through theirs in response to other denials of for cause challenges. That's why I said I would need to see the full transcript of the voir dire. Also, it may be that they had a peremptory in their pocket but were saving it for a backstrike (if those are allowed in that court) for an even facially worse juror.

Still, a for cause challenge should have been put on the record for the purposes of preserving the issue for appeal.

What has become blatantly apparent re the Stone case, is that there is indeed a double standard of criminal justice re Democrats v Republicans. From Comey to McCabe to Hillary destroying SUBPOENAED emails, and on to Brennan, Clapper and many who were at the conspiratorial core of the whole Muh Russia/"insurance policy"...the glaring elephant in the political room is whether or not Trump Nation swallows this (un)Equal Justice pill...or they don't. And if they don't, and these Deep State Operatives are given a pass...then what?

I heard an interview wherein a Trump NSC Advisor (K. Mcfarlane, I think) that a Deep State Bureaucrat working in the WH told a Trump High Up that "you can't fire us...we'll be here long after you are gone". In effect, Progressive Ideologues run this Government...POTUS no longer does...if they are anti-Transnational Progressive. And they all get rich on Taxpayer money up there.

The conversation and legal maneuvering is pointless, as it will solve nothing. The Deep State Progs will NEVER allow true Equal Justice, but (anti-Constitutional) Prog Operatives like Schumer, Pelosi, et al...will project and scream Trump undermining Constitution, and the MSM will back it up. Gas on the revolutionary fire.

Outside of a massive Trump electoral victory in the Fall, with the House and Senate going Red to disempower Prog Dems in Congress...the Transnational Progressives in the Bureaucracy will hold power. Trump's only play will be to alter the Budget in ways that severely CUT Bureaucracy, and move that money to massive Infrastructure Projects that will put money in the hands of the many who will jump into those good-paying jobs. If he presents that argument and opportunity to the pre-election folk...he will win it. I think he will.

Stone is a great way to focus on the REAL problem. It's nuclear war going on behind the scenes up there.

Really? That is just strange.

After the voir dire, we get a list with the names of all remaining veniremen, and we strike through the names of those we want to strike.

Half the discussion is usually an attempt not to waste a strike on a person that you think the other side will strike instead.

I tried a case once with three strikes per side. Only four veniremen were struck (rather than six), because both sides thought the same two people would be awful jurors.

The system you describe is so counter-ntuitive that it simply never occurred to me that any jurisdiction would handle the matter that way. But the “backstrike” thing (which we do not use) makes more sense in that system.

I wonder how many jurisdictions do things that way. Ran a google and saw only Louisiana and Florida (“Florida man”), but I suppose there may be more.

Yeah, I have done that, too. In our system, the post-voir-dire list is the order in which they will fill the jury, so you can do it if you are damned sure whom the other side will be striking from earlier in the list.

It only works if you are correct in that guess. It can backfire and lose you a good juror, too.

Does Louisiana allow shuffling of the venire?

quote:

---

TRCP 223 .... the trial judge of such court, upon the demand prior to voir dire examination by any party or attorney in the case reached for trial in such court, shall cause the names of all members of such assigned jury panel in such case to be placed in a receptacle, shuffled, and drawn, and such names shall be transcribed in the order drawn on the jury list from which the jury is to be selected to try such case. There shall be only one shuffle and drawing by the trial judge in each case.

---

If you see the venire sitting there in order, and you think the first half look awful for your case, you just look at the judge and say “shuffle.”. Handy tool.

quote:

---

Would Jackson have declined to dismiss her? Probably. But you do not preserve the matter for appeal if you do not make the request.

---

Hart claimed she could be fair. If her written contemporaneous accounts indicate otherwise, the matter is absolutely subject to appeal. Especially as she manipulated herself to a position of foreman.

Further as Jackson had already railroaded leftist partisans onto the jury pool over identical defense objections, there comes a point when bench-defense discord can hurt the client.