Discussion in 'Trials' started by Tricia, Jan 9, 2019.
This being the same man that left his calling card with Knowles' mother?
Amen to that.
Oops. See I was so excited to have our own posters giving us updates that I mistakenly put OSs instead of CA!
Sorry bout that! Lol!
I think it's May 30th. Guessing he will hear closing arguments then bid everyone an adieu?
Alternate will take his place in deliberations.
Were I that alternate I would be psyched.
What's the procedure, can they swap out a juror who can't stay during deliberations, or do they take them off before just to be on the safe side?
I think it's possible the jury could have the case by Weds afternoon and return a verdict on Thurs 30th. Ever hopeful.
You do? I hope you are right.I think it will take longer .
Dunno, I'm not predicting just saying it's possible. I suppose it comes down to whether there are differences of opinion.
I feel ya Meemaw!
I turned 72 on Christmas day, but I feel I should be at least 73 now or older. Lol! For so long this was a trial with no end in sight.
Thank goodness we're finally in a holding pattern waiting for CAs to begin.
It's been surreal at times.
Seems like it could get a little messy if the judge doesn't dismiss the juror before deliberations begin, if it stretches beyond the 30th, he has to go, an alternate comes in and they have to begin deliberations anew.
If they have a conviction before/by the 30th, he still needs to leave and then an alternate takes his place and decides aggravation/penalty without having been included in the guilt portion - don't know if that could be a basis for appeal but I think for things to go cleanly, judge should dismiss him before the jury gets the case.
I agree. Based on what I’ve heard in the past, I don’t think it would be a valid basis for appeal—but I really dislike the short deadline for deliberations before they’d have to start over.
You are right of course. It wouldnt be an appellate issue.
Remember the jury foreman himself was tossed from deliberations in Scott Peterson's trial for refusing to deliberate. He was replaced, and shortly after the guilty verdict was rendered.
SP has lost every appeal thus far since he has been on death row.
I'm pretty sure the judge addressed that. He said he would be dismissed before deliberations began. MOO.
I don't remember that! Why wouldn't he deliberate?
Did judge say this in front of jurors?
Nooooooo! It was in part 2 yesterday. It was "interesting to say the least!
OMG IT'S ALMOST OVER PEOPLE!
They should dismiss the juror that has to leave on the 30th. Deliberations could easily go a week and even if they don't, no reason for the jurors to feel rushed or need to start over.
<modsnip: off topic>
I agree with you, unpopular opinion or not.
We may be very surprised. I sure was when an alternate told us they would have acquitted a defendant, but the GPS alibi he had was irrelevant to them. Okay then...
Please continue discussion at Thread #20.
This thread is now closed.