90+% of DC is fiercely pro-establishment and anti-trump. I dont think it is far-fetched at all that they might have run out of unbiased jury members. It might also be quite difficult for the defense team to scan through every jury candidate's social media in a short timeframe. Particularly when some red flags are found with pretty much every candidate (because DC), and they have to pick the lesser of two evils in the nick of time.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Feb 18 2020 06:19am

All the excuses. You guys are battered wives.

This post was edited by Skinned on Feb 18 2020 06:23am

"In the nick of time" nigga trials are slow as fuck. Jury selection doesnt happen in an afternoon.

Having an inconvenient political leaning isn't a demonstration of bias. Juries will never be and should never be neutral to politics. Its a jury of your peers, not a jury of totally neutral hermits.

The absurdly high sentence (twice as high as the sentence given to your average rapist) is an indication that his trial was unfair, and what I wrote is an explanation for how this might have happened.



So... when a black boy is accused of having raped a white girl in Bumfuck Missouri, it's okay to try him in front of an all-white jury, right? According to you, their inconvenient political leanings dont prove bias, and a jury doesnt have to be neutral to politics, so it's totally fine.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Feb 18 2020 07:04am

Trump 2020! WoOt.

You cant strike all members of a specific race from a jury without specific cause for striking each juror. Additionally if you can substantiate that theres a blatant racist in the jury you get him out for free. The kind of situation you are describing has made it to the supreme court and been adjudicated already.

The standard for a jury has never been politically neutral. Trial attorneys are intimately familiar with jury selection tactics and challenges. If they could substantiate she wasnt capable of being objective then there are ways to remove her. Like I said the standard has never been politically neutral, it's able to be objective within reason.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Feb 18 2020 07:14am

I'm not proposing to get rid of each and every Democrat in the jury. But just like an avowed racist isnt suitable to try a "black boy allegedly raped white girl"-case, a person with a seething hatred of Trump and everything in his orbit isnt suitable to try a Trump associate.

Sure, but made some tweets on the subject doesnt rise to that level. If they can substantiate that then she shouldnt have been on the jury, and you can get a mistrial after the fact if you substantiate it afterwards. That hasnt been done and so its reasonable to say that kind of person hasnt been found.

Like I said, the standard has never been politically neutral, its able to act objectively based on whats shown in court.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Feb 18 2020 07:20am

Thor just went full retard by arguing for the basis of his opponents argument. Then spewing a second paragraph arguing his original thesis.

TrumpWrong.gif