MISTRIAL - Sidney Moorer on trial for the kidnapping of Heather Elvis #4

[TTF14]

I really think that jurors should take a qualification test prior to being considered as a juror or maybe even an IQ test even.

I heard a comedian recently do a bit about how he's not qualified to vote for the Presidency. He said something like, "you have to have a license to groom a dog in this country! But anyone can vote for who leads the whole country!" The sentiment is similar for jurors! Any old idiot can be a juror.

 

[Paulas88]

I really think that jurors should take a qualification test prior to being considered as a juror or maybe even an IQ test even.

I totally agree! This (IMO) was a black and white, nothing but net, a slam dunk GUILTY verdict. It saddens me to see the guilty go free, especially with all the vile grossness they've displayed through SM. Shoot, how many lies do they have to be caught in?

This should be a MURDER charge, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[bestill]

Video http://wbtw.com/2016/06/24/juror-explains-mistrial-in-sidney-moorer-kidnapping-case/

 

[DexterMorgan]

So its a hung jury after 10hrs of deliberation or what?

10-2 tells us the 2 are bias since it wasn't their daughter.

Jmo.

 

[JerseyGirl]

“If we were not doing a trial on circumstantial evidence, it would have been a much more way for us to sink our teeth into and come up with a proper verdict,” the juror explained. “But because of the fact there were so many what-ifs, ‘what if this happened,’ ‘what if that happened,’ and things of that nature, we were hopelessly deadlocked.”

The juror explained that when they first reported to Judge Markley Dennis that they could not reach a unanimous decision, and the judge asked them to deliberate longer, nothing changed. He says after another hour of talking the case over, no one changed their stance on whether they believed Sidney Moorer was guilty of kidnapping Heather Elvis.

The vote was deadlocked at 10 guilty votes and two not guilty votes, according to the juror.

http://wbtw.com/2016/06/24/juror-explains-mistrial-in-sidney-moorer-kidnapping-case/

sad day, sad that Heather didn't get justice and said that there are 2 people who didn't believe what we all saw.

 

[TTF14]

In the clip I watched, that particular juror did say it came down to who was in that truck. So the prosecution did NOT do a good enough job of explaining the definition of kidnapping/luring and also never mentioned the phrase/law that exists.....what was that? I forget, but it's been mentioned here several times.....something like "all for one, one for all" but definitely not that .

 

[GeeEm]

One good thing turned out to the public it certainly didn't turn out like OJ & CA😡

And for my own 2 cents JA should have gotten the needle 💉💉💉 JMO

 

[Paulas88]

How,long does it take usually for a 2nd trial to commence? Months, years?

 

[Hatfield]

I think the instructions were clear and so was the explanation of reasonable doubt. (That doesn't mean someone else would experience it similarly). I keep seeing the sentiment that people are too dumb and thinking in black and white terms to grasp reasonable doubt vs beyond the shadow and I don't think that's the case. I think when a judge instructs that if you have reasonable doubt on even one point of evidence, then you must find NG, a juror is stuck if they don't embrace the entire case.

To help prove why I believe our court systems need to do a better job of educating a jury about things before deliberations. Just look what happens in a lot of cases including this one. Questions come back to the judge regarding the jury instructions. I have seen many cases where the jury asks the judge about how they are supposed to interpret the evidence or other procedural jury instructions. It happened in this case.

I guess what I am trying to say is I think there is room for improvement to make sure the jurors really understand the procedural rules and how they are supposed to interpret the evidence in a case. Especially a circumstantial case or the more serious cases.
It happens way too fast and for a lot of people they have never been on a jury before so it just makes sense to me to give them really good instructions and make sure they understand before deliberations start.

It can only help and not hurt if that was to happen. The lack of a good understanding is what ends up hurting juries and cases and can even result in incorrect sentences for people.

 

[TTF14]

How,long does it take usually for a 2nd trial to commence? Months, years?

I have no clue, but I would not expect anything until at least 2017.

 

[spiritseeker31]

In the clip I watched, that particular juror did say it came down to who was in that truck. So the prosecution did NOT do a good enough job of explaining the definition of kidnapping/luring and also never mentioned the phrase/law that exists.....what was that? I forget, but it's been mentioned here several times.....something like "all for one, one for all" but definitely not that .

I would have smacked her/him right there. It doesn't matter!!! He lured her out.

Sent from my 5017B using Tapatalk

 

[coeurfragile]

I am very upset [emoji35] I hope that they can re try the case and get a guilty verdict. I had a feeling they were in for a hung jury as soon as I read about the defenses friend on the panel. Even if they say they can be impartial why risk it? You'd think that would be something judges DON'T want going on.

I show up diligently for the victims but it's hard to keep going when every case seems like it ends up deadlocked. People really do not have any common sense and that scares me that these are the people deciding if murderers and rapists walk free.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[spiritseeker31]

Not that any of you are this demented however, If you were in the Moorer's position right now, would you run?

Sent from my 5017B using Tapatalk

 

[TTF14]

I am very upset [emoji35] I hope that they can re try the case and get a guilty verdict. I had a feeling they were in for a hung jury as soon as I read about the defenses friend on the panel. Even if they say they can be impartial why risk it? You'd think that would be something judges DON'T want going on.

I show up diligently for the victims but it's hard to keep going when every case seems like it ends up deadlocked. People really do not have any common sense and that scares me that these are the people deciding if murderers and rapists walk free.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are a lot of wonderful things about the 21st century. The absolute reliance on DNA evidence is not one of them .

 

[JerseyGirl]

Speaking after Judge Markley Dennis declared a mistrial in the case, jury foreman Fred Lang said the prosecution's case was largely based on circumstantial evidence, making the jury's job difficult.

"There were so many what ifs. What if this happened? What if that happened? Things of that nature," he said. "Even though the state was saying that there was a possibility of him being there, of him doing this, there was no concrete evidence of the fact it happened. We were questioning in our own mind: It could have been somebody else? We didn't do the what ifs."

Lang said the jurors got along, but both sides were convinced of their positions.

"The fact of the matter was we could not say this is the way it should be because we could not come to that consensus,” he said. “You have to be unanimous, 100 percent.”

http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/crime/article_0f1386d6-3a4f-11e6-a96a-cffb901d4c93.html

it’s up to Solicitor Jimmy Richardson whether the case will be tried again.

__

that's pretty sad, I believe the evidence putting SM there was THERE. What a shame. The jury should be ashamed.

 

[TTF14]

Not that any of you are this demented however, If you were in the Moorer's position right now, would you run?

Sent from my 5017B using Tapatalk

No. They won't run. They don't think like the rest of us and probably look at this as a "not guilty" verdict and think they've won. So, no reason to run. I'd love to know how the heck they are paying their bills and not becoming homeless. They have got to be so far in debt, that alone is a sentence.

 

[spiritseeker31]

No. They won't run. They don't think like the rest of us and probably look at this as a "not guilty" verdict and think they've won. So, no reason to run. I'd love to know how the heck they are paying their bills and not becoming homeless. They have got to be so far in debt, that alone is a sentence.

Too true! But if it were me, I'd have my *advertiser censored* in Singapore or something by mid August lol.

Sent from my 5017B using Tapatalk

 

[Paulas88]

No. They won't run. They don't think like the rest of us and probably look at this as a "not guilty" verdict and think they've won. So, no reason to run. I'd love to know how the heck they are paying their bills and not becoming homeless. They have got to be so far in debt, that alone is a sentence.

I have a question along these lines... How have they supported themselfs? SM was a maintenance man, did/does TS work?
They went away for a months vacation, frequent Disney land and cruises, bought a new truck, took out $5000. from ATM.
I guess maintainance workers make mad bank?

 

[bestill]

Speaking after Judge Markley Dennis declared a mistrial in the case, jury foreman Fred Lang said the prosecution's case was largely based on circumstantial evidence, making the jury's job difficult.

"There were so many what ifs. What if this happened? What if that happened? Things of that nature," he said. "Even though the state was saying that there was a possibility of him being there, of him doing this, there was no concrete evidence of the fact it happened. We were questioning in our own mind: It could have been somebody else? We didn't do the what ifs."

Lang said the jurors got along, but both sides were convinced of their positions.

"The fact of the matter was we could not say this is the way it should be because we could not come to that consensus,” he said. “You have to be unanimous, 100 percent.”

http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/crime/article_0f1386d6-3a4f-11e6-a96a-cffb901d4c93.html

it’s up to Solicitor Jimmy Richardson whether the case will be tried again.

__

that's pretty sad, I believe the evidence putting SM there was THERE. What a shame. The jury should be ashamed.

BBM I bet this guy was a NG juror, read his words. He was the forman, he probably wanted a hung jury to keep him from being found Guilty. All my opinion.

 

[LBDunes]

That's strange, I consider the truck a major piece of the evidence that SM was the last person who was with her.

Well either it is they did not believe the expert's testimony that it was SM's truck or they were stuck on what if it wasn't SM in the truck.