Kenneth_2003 said:

---

FIDO*98* said:

---

I suspect this is going to end with a hung jury. This should have been a 20 minute deliberation with a NG verdict. The jury is split and people are dug in torn between doing the right thing and watching the city burn

---

Or some social justice ideologs that cannot get past their white guilt and feel the white guy needs to pay for the sins of the 1800s.

---

This is my guess. One or more Libs holding out to punish Perry because he is actually a real man or one or more POC that would always vote against a white person no matter what the evidence.

Sadly almost half the people in this country fully support this travesty of justice.

I heard today the jury was asking about "recklessness" and "negligence."

So what that indicates to me they are focusing on intent. I have not read the jury instructions nor heard them, however so I cannot tell 100% what is jury focus or jury confusion.

Judge Jeanine said yesterday that she's "very impressed with this jury". They're asking "all the right questions", and "I think they're really smart".

Gives me hope.

Similar to the Kim Potter jury. Overanalyzing legal definitions instead of using their common sense. Some people on that jury are looking for a legal reason to convict him.

I believe it came out after trial that the Potter jury was was confused as to the meaning of recklessness. The judge had given terrible instructions, but instead of asking for clarification they split into breakout groups in the jury room to try to define the legal terms on their own. They ended up confusing themselves.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

Similar to the Kim Potter jury. Overanalyzing legal definitions instead of using their common sense. Some people on that jury are looking for a legal reason to convict him.

I believe it came out after trial that the Potter jury was was confused as to the meaning of recklessness. The judge had given terrible instructions, but instead of asking for clarification they split into breakout groups in the jury room to try to define the legal terms on their own. They ended up confusing themselves.

---

Watched that trial as well. That judge :"Mommy" was awful.

An example of a George Soros trial

Jury has told judge they are deadlocked on manslaughter charge.

aggiehawg said:

---

Jury has told judge they are deadlocked on manslaughter charge.

---

How many different charges were there?

aggiehawg said:

---

Jury has told judge they are deadlocked on manslaughter charge.

---

Good result ?

Think judge sends them back to try for longer? I mean it's been 4 days

AgBQ-00 said:

---

Think judge sends them back to try for longer? I mean it's been 4 days

---

Yeah he'll give them an Allen charge, to try again.

SA68AG said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Jury has told judge they are deadlocked on manslaughter charge.

---

Good result ?

---

Still a criminally negligent homicide charge remaining.

Is that basically: "you can convict even if you think the guilt does not fit the filed charges"?

AgBQ-00 said:

---

Is that basically: "you can convict even if you think the guilt does not fit the filed charges"?

---

Not really. The instruction to the jury is to encourage those in the minority to carefully reconsider their bases for dispute with the majority in order to reach unanimity.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

WHY did this kid sit down with the cops and waive Miranda???

---

Because he's never been on Forum 16 before.

gotchya. was thinking of a different trial that recently happened. (not recalling which one)

I think the police are my friends.

but I would NEVER be interviewed by them or answer any of their questions.

Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

WHY did this kid sit down with the cops and waive Miranda???

---

Because he's never been on Forum 16 before.

---

Obviously I was asking rhetorically.

SwigAg11 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Jury has told judge they are deadlocked on manslaughter charge.

---

How many different charges were there?

---

Two.

Manslaughter and then criminally negligent homicide.

Goes to intent. Did he intend to kill him?

Or should he have reasonably known that holding him in the choke hold for six minutes could result in his death?

Well, hopefully this has been such a political ****show that if it ends in a mistrial that they just choose to let it go rather than try again.

But hopefully it's just one holdout for conviction and the rest can convince that idiot.

LMCane said:

---

I think the police are my friends.

but I would NEVER be interviewed by them or answer any of their questions.

---

Quote:

---

But hopefully it's just one holdout for conviction and the rest can convince that idiot.

---

Not sure whether to admire your optimism or scoff at your naivet.

I can easily see the manslaughter charge getting hung, but I have a feeling he's going to get convicted on the criminally negligent homicide.

SwigAg11 said:

---

I can easily see the manslaughter charge getting hung, but I have a feeling he's going to get convicted on the criminally negligent homicide.

---

Jury's sometimes lean on the lesser charge as a compromise to those that are steadfast in those against the higher charge.

SwigAg11 said:

---

I can easily see the manslaughter charge getting hung, but I have a feeling he's going to get convicted on the criminally negligent homicide.

---

At this point, unclear if they have even deliberated on the lesser charge yet.

I have not read or heard the jury instructions but have seen a report that the instructions have been given to the jury twice. They may be interpreting those instructions as they have to reach a verdict on the first charge before they deliberate on the second. If that is the case, the judge screwed up.

I believe it was reported that the cops that interviewed him called him a good Samaritan in their report. It still would have been wise to wait for counsel, but I doubt it would have changed him getting charged.

aggiehawg said:

---

SwigAg11 said:

---

I can easily see the manslaughter charge getting hung, but I have a feeling he's going to get convicted on the criminally negligent homicide.

---

At this point, unclear if they have even deliberated on the lesser charge yet.

I have not read or heard the jury instructions but have seen a report that the instructions have been given to the jury twice. They may be interpreting those instructions as they have to reach a verdict on the first charge before they deliberate on the second. If that is the case, the judge screwed up.

---

I don't think they can deliberate on the lesser charge unless they find him not guilty of the manslaughter charge. I read that those are the instructions and the prosecution is unhappy about it.