They HAVE to know the verdict will be overturned on appeal. As such, they may be looking dor a way out that doesn’t make them look like the corrupt, biased POS's that they are.
Something like this would allow them to say PDJT got off on a technicality (as it would necessitate a mistrial and a re-trial [which they'd likely not do]) rather than have the verdict get overturned - for any of the MANY wrongs/errors/illegalities - on appeal.
They HAVE to know the verdict will be overturned on appeal. As such, they may be looking dor a way out that doesn’t make them look like the corrupt, biased POS's that they are.
Something like this would allow them to say PDJT got off on a technicality (as it would necessitate a mistrial and a re-trial [which they'd likely not do]) rather than have the verdict get overturned - for any of the MANY wrongs/errors/illegalities - on appeal.