Let me tell you what's going on. Someone has gotten to the jury, threatened them.

It's too important for them to have riots, the media depends on the false narrative.

I was once on a jury for a nigger being tried for resisting arrest. First round o f anonymous votes it was 11-1 guilty. After everyone gave their opinion, the hold out said 'I don't want to be responsible for sending someone to prison'. We had to convince her we had no say on the sentence, that was up to the judge.

Usually.they just want to gtfo

beer pong tournament

You've never done jury duty?

Christ, it's 1 person who simply can't Possibly see anything outside of their narrow fucking view of the universe. ZERO empathy (ability to see something from a different viewpoint).

In my case (last time), it was one rich ole white lady who though LEOs could do no wrong, tell no lies, stretch no truths. All of us thought the defendant was guilty as fuck, but there was reasonable doubt (even the video evidence was loaded with doubt).... she simply stuck to the "Cops do no wrong" attitude and wouldn't budge... for 2 days. Judge finally had a discussion with her after the rest of us said we were in agreement and we were 'hung'. No idea what was said, but she changed her vote then and there and we all got to go home. It was that or coming back to sit in silence for yet Another day or until the judge chose to go the mistrial route (and they would rather inconvenience the jurors than do the paperwork).

We were not allowed any "evidence" in our room, just whatever notes we happened to take.

In this case, it benefits the prosecution in no way to mistrial. All that will do is KEEP the thing in focus, make people wonder Why it mistrialed... but it does give Both sides time to reset and take the new findings to make a better case for next time. Anyone here think that the prosecution has gained the upper hand and would benefit from trying again?

Have you seen 12 angry men? If not, it's a must-watch movie.

Six (seven with standby) jurors on a DWI case. I was convinced (a) the girl was drunk and (b) the prosecution failed miserably to prove it. Then I got chosen as backup and had to sit in a library/conference room[1] while the other six people decided the case. We were all grumpy since we'd sat since 08:00 and then the trial started at 12:30 with no lunch break. I think they found her guilty (fast) so they could GTFO.

[1] A couple cops stood outside the door loudly discussing the case.

Trial 2: Drunk, smashed window etc. Picked for jury. Asshole ADA (aren't they all?) clearly has no evidence of the greater charge, and all could see that. Judge halts trial, sends us (jury) into jury room. Comes in 15 min later and says y'all can go. If you want details, stay and I'll 'splain. No One left. Judge says ADA f'ed up the major charge so judge threw it out; ADA and defense plea-bargained lesser charge.

Lessons learned: Most cases you get are going to involve alcohol. DAs and ADAs are proof that shit can be animated and even attend law school.

Jury's are another symptomatic microcosm of everything wrong with Democracy.

What is going in is that the Ghislaine Maxwell trial has begun and the powers that be are desperate to hide from it because she was stealing babies.