SBI probe into possible juror misconduct

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
evelyn24 said:
Oh please, anyone can post anything online. I'm a little more relieved this is something the media reported to the judge after seeing it on Facebook.
Click to expand...

I agree, and think that is why the SBI is involved. They can track the facebook user, and see if he or she is truly a friend of a juror, and investigate if that friend did have texts or phone calls. All of that should be pretty simple to solve. If it does turn out to be true, I don't know what the remedy would be, other than a mistrial, and that seems so harsh for this. But, then, if they were communicating during deliberations, how can you be sure they didn't do other outside research? Or broke other rules?

I did see a post on the golo comments talking about the vote being 9-3 at some point, but I just assumed people were making things up. My guess is a commentator wanted to seem more important than he/she really was.
 
I see Mistrial written all over this one. Which is really to bad. And I hope the judge will throw the ones that did tis in jail for contempt.
 
I'm curious to know what the law is here and if this has happened in the past, specifically if it's possible to declare a mistrial after a verdict has already been rendered.

If anything, I can see appeals court reversing the case/new trial if it's proven there was juror misconduct.
 
Ok, I am not going to panic. Who is to say that the person posting on WRAL was for real? Anyone can post anything and people do lie. JY is proof of that.
 
Wolfpack said:
I agree, and think that is why the SBI is involved. They can track the facebook user, and see if he or she is truly a friend of a juror, and investigate if that friend did have texts or phone calls. All of that should be pretty simple to solve. If it does turn out to be true, I don't know what the remedy would be, other than a mistrial, and that seems so harsh for this. But, then, if they were communicating during deliberations, how can you be sure they didn't do other outside research? Or broke other rules?

I did see a post on the golo comments talking about the vote being 9-3 at some point, but I just assumed people were making things up. My guess is a commentator wanted to seem more important than he/she really was.
Click to expand...

HA! the vote was NEVER 9-3!
 
For information on how they can declare a mistrial after the verdict is rendered (which I think UNLIKELY IN THIS CASE) on the basis of juror misconduct:

Granting a motion for a new trial for misconduct discovered after the verdict. Like a motion for mistrial, a motion for a new trial is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge, and unless his or her ruling is clearly erroneous or an abuse of discretion, it will not be disturbed. State v. Johnson, 295 N.C. 227 (1978); State v. Sneeden, 274 N.C. 498 (1968)
Click to expand...
 
knicksgal1 said:
Ok, I am not going to panic. Who is to say that the person posting on WRAL was for real? Anyone can post anything and people do lie. JY is proof of that.
Click to expand...

What was the reasoning for WRAL even reporting it? And why would they wait until after the verdict was read if that is when in fact it happened. jmo
 
RaleighNC said:
Did you read the WRAL article that stated that "WRAL News reported the posts to Stephens upon finding them Monday afternoon."

Was either the juror or the person to whom they were communicating on GOLO???????

Oh my.
Click to expand...

BBM

Sorry have not been able to figure it out, what is GOLO? :blushing:
 
nursebeeme said:
from wolf's quote:

after someone posted on WRAL News' Facebook page that a juror was reportedly communicating during deliberations with someone outside the case about the jury's progress.

could also be someone just saying it to be a troll


eta: it wasn't the juror posting on facebook in my understanding
Click to expand...

Right. Someone posted on WRAL FB that a juror was communicating about the case with "someone"....doesn't say where....
 
mck16 said:
What was the reasoning for WRAL even reporting it? And why would they wait until after the verdict was read if that is when in fact it happened. jmo
Click to expand...

Because the person that made it up didn't post it until after the guilty verdict?
~moo
 
If you overheard a juror discussing a case would you go to facebook to "turn them in" or to the courthouse?
 
NO! No no no no no no no! I will be sick if he gets out of prison over this!!
 
mck16 said:
What was the reasoning for WRAL even reporting it? And why would they wait until after the verdict was read if that is when in fact it happened. jmo
Click to expand...

WRAL reported it because they felt it was their duty to bring it to the attention of the judge, if it did in fact occur. I would be they didn't bring it up before Monday afternoon (which is when the article says the Judge was told), and may have been after the verdict, because they may not have known about it until then. Not all facebook moderators catch things on the WRAL page, and things get through the cracks a lot over there.
 
nursebeeme said:
from wolf's quote:

after someone posted on WRAL News' Facebook page that a juror was reportedly communicating during deliberations with someone outside the case about the jury's progress.

could also be someone just saying it to be a troll


eta: it wasn't the juror posting on facebook in my understanding
Click to expand...

IMO yes it was a big ol' JY groupie and troll. I just mentioned WRAL comment section in the other thread before you started this one because I read those pro JY comments and some were trollish. If the juror was communicating then why wait until after a verdict to post on WRAL's FB? And why not call the damn DA's office?
This is BS...ALL IMO of course.
 
Those people are crazy that post on GOLO. IMO Some of the post does not even make any sense at all.
 
I bet it's baloney they have to investigate but it won't come to anything. I find it hard to believe if the judge knew Monday something had gone on that might cause a mistrial and a new trial he would have said the stuff he did about what he really thought of JY. That tells me he knows it's nothing.
 
gngr~snap said:
If you overheard a juror discussing a case would you go to facebook to "turn them in" or to the courthouse?
Click to expand...

Exactly. I will eat glass if this really happened. I bet when the person who made the comment is looked into, they probably aren't even in NC or have no connection to anyone on the jury in anyway at all. Most likely crapping bricks for posting that in the first place now that it's gone to this level. The judge has to have it investigated though because the media reported the posts, and you know how that goes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 225 more.
Total: 3,800 (members: 226, guests: 3,574)

Online statistics

Members online
226
Guests online
3,574
Total visitors
3,800
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,257
Messages
17,966,383
Members
228,734
Latest member
TexasCuriousMynd
Back
Top