08-24-2011, 11:02 AM
(08-23-2011, 11:38 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: "We did our first vote and it came out half to acquit, half to convict," says the juror. "And we talked about it for a while, going through the evidence. I'd say that some people got intense, but there were no personal attacks, no real yelling. And we talked for a while, then it was 11-1 to acquit. And the guy who didn't want to acquit basically looked at us and said, 'O.K., whatever you all want.' He knew he wasn't going to convince us."
[One of the women jurors] asked me, 'Are you okay with this?' and I said, 'Hell, no. But what else can we do? We promised to follow the law.' "
Nearly two months later, would the juror change his vote? "I've learned a lot more about the case by reading the documents," he says.
I don't believe this douchebag. This is 'damage control' to make him a victim of "following the rule(s) of law". It's bullshit and rationalization.
And the juror who 'caved' on the manslaughter charge . . . Sure, pal . . . there was no intimidation or harassment during deliberations!

Go ahead, explain how this type of apathy is considered promising to "follow the law"? Stand your ground, pussy! Hang the fucking jury on this count!
Funny how this cowardly prick never mentioned anything about child neglect.
Instead of ex post facto document reading, spin the old chart topper by Ricky Nelson - The Last Kiss.
Thanks for your service holding the one responsible for the death of Caylee Anthony and letting 'mother of the decade' get away with:
"Oh where, oh where can my baby be?"
BTW - How much did People pay for your insightful bullshit? I'm sure you donated any remuneration, you received, to George and Cindy's NEW foundation.
Didn't you . . . douche?