I think the appropriate way to handle it would be to include it in the instructions at the end of each day. If it isn't already included in there. I know don't discuss the case with others is in there.
Not sure about if anyone approaches you to discuss the case please inform the court. Or something similar. Not naming sides or a group of people specifically.
What has me a little concerned is that I kind of thought the jury might be anxious to deliberate. After so long being in trial hearing testimony, I thought they might be anxious to discuss it and not break for lunch. Probably best to still take a lunch for their own mental health though.
This is very true.
We had a girl who isn't even a paralegal but is considering becoming a lawyer shadow and assist us on a recent case. She was a valuable asset because she had experience with the case's subject matter. She also had technical skills we needed.
She was allowed to visit the incarcerated client, she went into court every day all day, I think the only thing she didn't do was go back to the holding cell at the courthouse. She was basically treated as a lawyer.
I'm inclined to agree. I don't think this guy is doing anything except producing the documentary. I don't think he has legal knowledge. I think just like we did with our assistant, if you slap a label on a person they suddenly become part of your team.
I dont see how pleading total ignorance will work for Wallace.
Even the average citizens knows no one is to ever approach any of the jurors during any trial for any reason.
Heck if they even watch fictional crime shows they already know trying to tamper with jurors is a big no no, and a very big deal.
That's been brought out many times, over, and over again, whether on TV shows or even movies have been made about it.
Another thing that doesn't make any logical sense to me is the DT asked for two long days to even turnover the affidavit.
It gives the impression they need that long to get their 'story' together in order to hide or CYAs.
I do very much agree with Imes on this matter.
It now calls into question if the DT, and those connected to the defense side has tried to made contact with any of the sitting jurors who are deliberating now.
It makes me worry if there is a possible stealth juror or two on this jury.
I certainly don't think Wallace did this bold move because of ignorance.
I want to know if the two lawyers told Wallace it's okay to approach the two alernates or other jurors. Imo, he did not do this on his own. Imo. I'm sure this isnt his first trial rodeo where judges made it very clear about not approaching jurors.
Imo, this pro defense one sided documentary has made it all about the DT, and those connected to them.
Imo, that's why their unethical bizarre dramatic behaviors throughout the trial has been so abhorrent.
Instead of calmly challenging the evidence its become all about how dramatic they will look when the documentary is finalized.
Instead of a serious trial for the DT it's become much more about their self centered notoriety.
Imo, they all have made a mockery out of this trial where four innocent people were murdered by their client.
And sadly not a damn one on the DT seems to care about ethical conduct either.
JMHOO
