But having "cruddy facts" is not the situation here. If a prosecutor can't prove his case beyond reasonable doubt, that's a decision the jury is supposed to make. But in this case it appears to me the jurors were asked if the defendant was convicted, could they support the punishment the law provides. If a juror says yes in voir dire but then indicates in deliberation he lied, then the integrity of the justice system is most definitely compromised.ScottDLS wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 11:46 pm
I see what you are saying, but seems like a very dangerous and slippery slope. During voir dire the prospective jurors are often being asked to speculate...”Would you be able to? Could you consider?” Ah yes, could, woulda, should, except when I saw your cruddy facts Mr Prosecutor and they triggered my SJW instincts. The integrity of the jury system would be seriously at risk if jurors could be punished for their decisions by holding that they were contrary to their answers during voir dire. Massive 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment issues at play here IMO.
Search found 4 matches
Return to “Not The Whole Book-But Should Be Enough”
- Fri Aug 30, 2019 10:21 am
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Not The Whole Book-But Should Be Enough
- Replies: 35
- Views: 9099
Re: Not The Whole Book-But Should Be Enough
- Thu Aug 29, 2019 10:59 am
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Not The Whole Book-But Should Be Enough
- Replies: 35
- Views: 9099
- Tue Aug 27, 2019 6:46 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Not The Whole Book-But Should Be Enough
- Replies: 35
- Views: 9099
Re: Not The Whole Book-But Should Be Enough
Good overview, and wow what an awful case. I can see why you wanted to go for 50!
Good job on reaching a verdict.
Good job on reaching a verdict.
- Tue Aug 27, 2019 4:50 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Not The Whole Book-But Should Be Enough
- Replies: 35
- Views: 9099
Re: Not The Whole Book-But Should Be Enough
Likewise when I was called into voir dire for a DUI case, both prosecutor and defense attorney spent some time reading the law to us and asking if anyone would have trouble following it, basically. I would think a juror who answered yes at voir dire but no in the deliberations would be at some legal risk. If I were on the jury, especially as foreman, I would be tempted to report such juror to the judge. Sounds like the 11 of you did a good job of showing him or her a bit of common sense and integrity.
Question though: I cannot find a Penal Code citation for "aggravated" theft. There's levels of misdemeanor and felony theft based on the value of what was stolen, but I don't find the word "aggravated' in PC Chapter 31 Theft.
Can you explain a little more about the charges, what was stolen?
Question though: I cannot find a Penal Code citation for "aggravated" theft. There's levels of misdemeanor and felony theft based on the value of what was stolen, but I don't find the word "aggravated' in PC Chapter 31 Theft.
Can you explain a little more about the charges, what was stolen?