After that BS conviction, I've got little faith in the courts to do what's right for poor Kyle.
If he is anything other than 100% exonerated, that will tell us all we need to know about the legal system in this country and our options for moving forward.
Sure does. The Judge will remove everyone from the room except the bailiff and the record-keeper and poll the jury; directly asking each person what their verdict is and if their verdict is being influenced by anything outside of the evidence.
If they were to say that they are afraid of riots, the judge could dismiss them and recall alternates to replace them. Once they say they're afraid of riots, they're no longer being an impartial juror and it would be unconstitutional for the judge to allow them to remain on the jury as it would violate Kyle's right to a fair trial.
As far as I know, this is a very rare occurrence. But this case has been pretty wacky altogether anyway.
The Judge can ask each juror what their verdict is at this particular time? That is fucked. I could understand asking about external influence impacting their ability to reach a decision; but asking their position seems terribly unconstitutional.
Generally, the Judge is an authority figure. If he were to ask any of the jurors their position, it might elicit a response that will be meant to please the Judge. Such an inquiry by the Judge would likely impact impartiality. Further, imagine that the Judge asks a juror their position, the juror sides with acquittal but is frightened of the backlash, the Judge dismisses the juror. This would absolutely interfere with Rittenhouse's right to a fair trial (dismissing a juror inclined to acquit).
Right I get that.
If the judge is worried the Jury has been influenced or coerced how does he go about it?
Does he wait for their verdict and then ask them?
Edit: as in what power does the judge have to figure it out?
Not at all. They are under oath in that circumstance. The judge's priority is to protect the rights of the accused. So he can ask them, and they must answer truthfully or perjure themselves or be in contempt of court.
Yup….can happen multiple times depending on the judge. The foreman need to tell the judge that they are hopelessly deadlocked…if not, he’ll send them back to review the evidence again.
Add jury intimidation to the list of crimes WE THE PEOPLE demand answers to. BLM and ANTIFA rioters are the paid mercenaries of the left. Everyone knows this. Time something was done about it, Brandon.
I just keep imagining the McDonalds and UPS workers who are being called to the front lines... We need a National Guard that is strictly voluntary with no pay to attract Patriots, not people who need an extra buck (militia?)
As much as I'd love to see dead commies, this seems to be exactly the kind of thing that leads to a certain precedent that conspiracy theories have been tracking for years.
The jurists have asked for a 20-minute head-start to get in their cars and drive to the nearest bomb shelter before the verdict is revealed. They have also asked for 24/7 armed security provided by Kyle Rittenhouse.
Seriously. Remember when he kept crowing about Andrew Cuomo being arrested a few weeks ago? What the hell ever happened to that? His sources fucking suck, at the least. At most, he’s glowing harder than a rave.
My question is, how would Jack P know? Yes, he says a US Marshal told him, but, how would a Marshal know this information? Worse, why would a US Marshal blab that to someone in the "news"?
Cuomo would've been arrested if NY wasn't corrupt. His sources were probably correct, everybody ran with the story that he was going to be charged, but then the SDNY came out and said it was false
I think they were definitely considering it to throw him under the bus, but ultimately didn't
I am hearing that the jurors are afraid the media will leak their names to the mob. That actually sounds like a legitimate concern, the media would not care one bit if they put innocent families at risk
From now on in these kinds of cases, each potential juror should be tossed into a room full of stark raving mad BLM protestors and watch their reaction. If they cower in the corner or scream for help they should be rejected. Until you get 12 fearless jurors.
Announce the not guilty verdict and then send the boys out armed to the teeth ready to stop any rioting. We should not and will not tolerate any more of these threats from ANYONE. If they take to the steets after the verdict, we should too. They get violent and destructive, we put a stop to it. Or you know the local gov could do something crazy, like their jobs, and stop the threats and riots.
Then those cowards should have asked to be excused. You need to make the decision based on evidence, not because you are intimidated. What if that was your son in Kyle’s place?.
Mistrial? Clearly, these people are unable to make the kind of decision that's called for. No assurances will offer them peace of mind. A sequestered jury is the only way to proceed with the rabid zombified minions on the loose.
So, in other words, they know he's innocent.
In other words, they're delaying the verdict until the 17th 😎
Will this maybe lead to a reconsideration of the Chauvin verdict? I can't see how it could but maybe?
Fuck I sure hope so.
I really doubt it, but never hurts to have hope.
After that BS conviction, I've got little faith in the courts to do what's right for poor Kyle.
If he is anything other than 100% exonerated, that will tell us all we need to know about the legal system in this country and our options for moving forward.
At least with that case its a more visually repulsing act that could be looked at few different ways.
Here its obvious self defense and at worst unable to be determined clearly which equals reasonable doubt which equals not guilty
I get what you are saying & agree with you, but I disagree about Kyle being "obviously self defense."
All that the MSM & normies see is an AR15, and AR's in the hands of mere citizens is EVIL!
Well i meant obvious self defense AT BEST and at worst hard to determine meaning not guilty
Gotcha.... it's good. 😎👍🏻🙏🏻⚡
Chauvins trial should never have been able to finish. Once Floyd's family was paid $27m that should have caused a mistrial with Prejudice.
Do we know if the two holdouts are saying guilty, and everyone else saying innocent, or vice versa?
Well not necessarily. If they stick to it then a mistrial will be declared and we go through all of this again.
Not Guilty!!!
The judge decides if the jury is hung. He can dismiss the case with prejudice, and then it cannot be tried again.
ok. I know he can do a directed judgement but I did not know he can dismiss with prejudice.
He should if they come back hung.
That ship has all but sailed when the defense’s motion to dismiss with prejuidce wasnt granted...If their hung they get the option to retry it
Incorrect, Judge said he’s going to wait until after the jury is done deliberating to decide if the trial should be dismissed with prejudice.
Alright then game on
That's tampering with the jury isn't it? Threatening to riot to get the result you want.
I hope the jury makes its decision on the merit of the case alone.
They will once the judge polls the jury and sends them back into deliberations.
Oh Snap! Is this a real thing that happens???
Sure does. The Judge will remove everyone from the room except the bailiff and the record-keeper and poll the jury; directly asking each person what their verdict is and if their verdict is being influenced by anything outside of the evidence.
If they were to say that they are afraid of riots, the judge could dismiss them and recall alternates to replace them. Once they say they're afraid of riots, they're no longer being an impartial juror and it would be unconstitutional for the judge to allow them to remain on the jury as it would violate Kyle's right to a fair trial.
As far as I know, this is a very rare occurrence. But this case has been pretty wacky altogether anyway.
Interesting insight, thanks.
WOW. Thank you for the detailed reply.
This does not seem to be so implausible for this case.
The Judge can ask each juror what their verdict is at this particular time? That is fucked. I could understand asking about external influence impacting their ability to reach a decision; but asking their position seems terribly unconstitutional.
How is a judge asking what their position is unconstitutional?
Genuinely curious.
Generally, the Judge is an authority figure. If he were to ask any of the jurors their position, it might elicit a response that will be meant to please the Judge. Such an inquiry by the Judge would likely impact impartiality. Further, imagine that the Judge asks a juror their position, the juror sides with acquittal but is frightened of the backlash, the Judge dismisses the juror. This would absolutely interfere with Rittenhouse's right to a fair trial (dismissing a juror inclined to acquit).
But the decision is always going to go to the judge so I don't understand your point? Also if they're worried about riots that's probably a good sign.
Right I get that.
If the judge is worried the Jury has been influenced or coerced how does he go about it?
Does he wait for their verdict and then ask them?
Edit: as in what power does the judge have to figure it out?
Not at all. They are under oath in that circumstance. The judge's priority is to protect the rights of the accused. So he can ask them, and they must answer truthfully or perjure themselves or be in contempt of court.
Yup….can happen multiple times depending on the judge. The foreman need to tell the judge that they are hopelessly deadlocked…if not, he’ll send them back to review the evidence again.
How can there be a deadlock? From what I've been reading (I've never even been in a court), the verdict of guilty must be unanimous, I believe(d).
Do all 12 jurors have to agree on either guilty or not guilty???
No not necessarily but then you have a hung jury which means it could be tried again. There are other issues. I only know about a hung jury.
In order to convict yes. In criminal trials it has to be unanimous.
Hope so
Add jury intimidation to the list of crimes WE THE PEOPLE demand answers to. BLM and ANTIFA rioters are the paid mercenaries of the left. Everyone knows this. Time something was done about it, Brandon.
I just keep imagining the McDonalds and UPS workers who are being called to the front lines... We need a National Guard that is strictly voluntary with no pay to attract Patriots, not people who need an extra buck (militia?)
As much as I'd love to see dead commies, this seems to be exactly the kind of thing that leads to a certain precedent that conspiracy theories have been tracking for years.
Amen
That’s the thing, though. They would be PROUD that they influenced a jury through this, and it would only compel them to keep it up, in the future.
Everyone knows the dems have used jury intimidation since Tammany Hall.
So, the Babylon Bee article was correct after all?
https://babylonbee.com/news/judge-instructs-jury-to-ignore-angry-mob-outside-threatening-to-burn-down-courthouse
BabBee shouldn't be publishing shit that's basically true. It really blurs the line with reality HAHAHA.
I already consider them a legitimate news source anyway sooooo....
They may just run out of material soon.
The jurists have asked for a 20-minute head-start to get in their cars and drive to the nearest bomb shelter before the verdict is revealed. They have also asked for 24/7 armed security provided by Kyle Rittenhouse.
I wish it was true, lmao.
Still praying these jurors do the right thing . God bless you Kyle.
Good Lord, and this tweet just raises the energy... they will start rioting before the verdict, now.
Poso glows
Seriously. Remember when he kept crowing about Andrew Cuomo being arrested a few weeks ago? What the hell ever happened to that? His sources fucking suck, at the least. At most, he’s glowing harder than a rave.
My question is, how would Jack P know? Yes, he says a US Marshal told him, but, how would a Marshal know this information? Worse, why would a US Marshal blab that to someone in the "news"?
Cuomo would've been arrested if NY wasn't corrupt. His sources were probably correct, everybody ran with the story that he was going to be charged, but then the SDNY came out and said it was false
I think they were definitely considering it to throw him under the bus, but ultimately didn't
Then it must be not guilty. Just get this done so the riots can start and the dummies can see who burns down their cities.
Damn straight I want to see bodies lining up on the sidewalk before being tossed into a incinerator.
I’m sure there are starving wolves or lions somewhere who need to be fed
The national guard will 'protect' BLM and Antifa - you shouldn't expect anything else
Does the Judge have the right to dismiss the two of them and bring in two of the alternates? I believe the alternates were there for the whole trial.
Good plan
Wish he would've done that tonight.
I am hearing that the jurors are afraid the media will leak their names to the mob. That actually sounds like a legitimate concern, the media would not care one bit if they put innocent families at risk
I wondered why it was taking so long.
From now on in these kinds of cases, each potential juror should be tossed into a room full of stark raving mad BLM protestors and watch their reaction. If they cower in the corner or scream for help they should be rejected. Until you get 12 fearless jurors.
Another great plan
They should have been sequestered the whole time.
You have a better chance of seeing Halley's Comet fly through your living room window tonight than BLM terrorists ever getting arrested.
Pontius Pilate moment. Pilate was cowed into a guilty verdict by the mob and condemned an innocent man. Pray for the jury.
Damn you’re spot on
Announce the not guilty verdict and then send the boys out armed to the teeth ready to stop any rioting. We should not and will not tolerate any more of these threats from ANYONE. If they take to the steets after the verdict, we should too. They get violent and destructive, we put a stop to it. Or you know the local gov could do something crazy, like their jobs, and stop the threats and riots.
Are they allowed to discuss what is going on before the verdict?
No. So this is either bullshit, or someone close enough to the room to hear deliberations snuck out a text.
Or one of them
Doubt it. They likely don't have their phones at all.
Hope not
...I guess they need to give those fucktards more time to travel from other states
If your verdict is based on whether or not a group of paid activists stir up shit, then you should be far, far away from any legal proceeding.
This is BLM Justice
Extortion of the jury, the city and property
Load, aim and wait for the first person to exhibit a violent or destructive act; and eliminate. Repeat as necessary.
That means the rest of the people said NOT GUILTY but 2 people are afraid of saying NOT GUILTY. They wouldn't be hesitant for a GUILTY verdict.
Then those cowards should have asked to be excused. You need to make the decision based on evidence, not because you are intimidated. What if that was your son in Kyle’s place?.
Mistrial? Clearly, these people are unable to make the kind of decision that's called for. No assurances will offer them peace of mind. A sequestered jury is the only way to proceed with the rabid zombified minions on the loose.
Get the verdict, release the jury, everyone else stays. Once the jury is returned home, release the verdict.
If there is anyone we can government agency we can trust, it is the US Marshall service.
Free Kyle!!!!
Meh. Hard to trust Jack. Regardless, fear of backlash is not what should motivate a juror’s decision. Sheesh.
The two jurors in question are holding out their innocent verdict until daylight morning hours because roaches come out at night.
Bring in a food truck most of those blm looked a little hungry
Jacek Posobiec??? wtf is a jacek
It's a Polish first name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacek
I guess he goes by Jack to anglicise it.
Recent GP article states that the 500 NG are stationed an hour and a half away, and not in Kenosha
How does a US Marshal in Kenosha know what's going on behind the doors of a jury deliberation??