The Roger Stone Trial

#601
#601
luthervol said:
Do you even see what you are saying????????
You ridiculed me for doubting and then said you doubt almost everything.
Click to expand...
Yes, but I read the articles before I express my doubts. See the difference? It's a novel concept for you, I know, but you just might want to try it.
 
#604
#604
Mick said:
Your point? Nothing prevented his lawyers from asking questions to determine if there is a bias against Roger Stone/Trump and refusing their participation.
Click to expand...

I’m sure they did ask, I’m sure the prosecutor asked and I’m sure questions were on the questionnaire so did she lie? Was her political leanings and biases withheld from the defense? In either case a mistrial looks plausible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols40
#605
#605
hog88 said:
I’m sure they did ask, I’m sure the prosecutor asked and I’m sure questions were on the questionnaire so did she lie? Was her political leanings and biases withheld from the defense? In either case a mistrial looks plausible.
Click to expand...
Let's just retry it. Sounds fine with me. Keep it going til the election.
 
#606
#606
hog88 said:
I’m sure they did ask, I’m sure the prosecutor asked and I’m sure questions were on the questionnaire so did she lie? Was her political leanings and biases withheld from the defense? In either case a mistrial looks plausible.
Click to expand...

If she could of controlled her TDS, no one would of ever known. Could of had victory in silence, but chose self defeat in voicing her views.
 
#607
#607
hog88 said:
How much background info does the defense or prosecution get about potential jurors? Do they even get names? When I went for jury duty I was referred to by number and not name.
Click to expand...
No idea about federal trials, but where I work, both parties are provided with a list of jurors including their name and their profession or employer. You’re expected to do your own research beyond that.

I understand that one of the federal judges here doesn’t let the attorneys question jurors. He does it himself.

If she disclosed the bias and remained on the jury, it’s a non issue.* If she was asked and did not disclose that’s an issue.

I don’t know about the in-between so this is all my opinion: If she was not asked at all, she and perhaps other jurors should be called back to an evidentiary hearing and the government should have to clear a high bar to show she wasn’t biased during deliberations. I’d also say if she was on twitter *****ing on Trump during the trial, this would be my preferred outcome.

*- I didn’t read the article so I’m basing that on the assumption that what’s been said here was accurate.
 
#608
#608
Tennesseefan2019 said:
I think President Trump will pardon Roger Stone.
Click to expand...

Witness tampering and lying to Congress seems like something that trump would encourage, I'd be shocked if trump didn't pardon everyone who's kissed his fat ass on his way out the door.
 
#609
#609
Septic said:
Witness tampering and lying to Congress seems like something that trump would encourage, I'd be shocked if trump didn't pardon everyone who's kissed his fat ass on his way out the door.
Click to expand...

Aww, poor little fella. When you run out of this free sample, Walgreens has only a couple left......they're going fast.

EQWRPSkXYAALbW3.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeD and Tennesseefan2019
#611
#611
VolnJC said:
Mistral..jury foreperson either lied or was granted illegal access to jury by judge
Click to expand...

That thread is about 95% nonsense.

If he’s correct and there was a motion to strike her for cause that was overruled, then the chances of a mistrial are much much lower.
 
#613
#613
Rifleman said:
View attachment 261385
Click to expand...

😂

If her posts don’t evince a bias then my analysis changes significantly.

If her posts weren’t made during the trial, then my analysis doesn’t change very much unless they were only made after.

I thought about acknowledging that it’s becoming increasingly difficult to trust people on here when it comes to evaluating Trump bias, but I figured it would end up becoming the issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rifleman
#618
#618
RockyTop85 said:
No idea about federal trials, but where I work, both parties are provided with a list of jurors including their name and their profession or employer. You’re expected to do your own research beyond that.

I understand that one of the federal judges here doesn’t let the attorneys question jurors. He does it himself.

If she disclosed the bias and remained on the jury, it’s a non issue.* If she was asked and did not disclose that’s an issue.

I don’t know about the in-between so this is all my opinion: If she was not asked at all, she and perhaps other jurors should be called back to an evidentiary hearing and the government should have to clear a high bar to show she wasn’t biased during deliberations. I’d also say if she was on twitter *****ing on Trump during the trial, this would be my preferred outcome.

*- I didn’t read the article so I’m basing that on the assumption that what’s been said here was accurate.
Click to expand...
thanks for the information
 
#619
#619
Septic said:
Witness tampering and lying to Congress seems like something that trump would encourage, I'd be shocked if trump didn't pardon everyone who's kissed his fat ass on his way out the door.
Click to expand...

Lying to Congress should be encouraged at every turn. They lie to us every damn day.
 
#620
#620
As to this juror issue, a lot depends on what was known at the time by counsel, and what was disclosed by the juror. This in turn depends largely on what was posted before/after trial.

And let's not forget, she was not the only juror. 11 other people voted to convict, as well, so Trumpsters may want to think about the unintended consequences of doing this again, i.e. what else might come out about Trump if there is a second trial. Now, that is not Stone's concern. But Trump would probably prefer this just fade away.
 
#621
#621
hog88 said:
Lying to Congress should be encouraged at every turn. They lie to us every damn day.
Click to expand...

Is this a vindictive race to the bottom for you? Lower the bar and keep being surprised when nothing changes?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: USAFgolferVol
#624
#624
tennvols77 said:
It's a lack of serious consequences. Never having your feet held to the fire results in acting out and doing it again and again.

If these people acting out knew before hand that the result of their actions was being in a hospital for months, or being in a wheelchair for the rest of their lives, or death, the percentage would drop dramatically, but, still, there would be some who would act out.
Click to expand...
There isn’t any consequences to the left, very few things. I think the left sees, if antifa, Demon raps, and other groups can get away with it, then the rest can. They have no heart, and conscience, and they seem to be brain dead on their actions. Demon possessed of destruction is what I call it. It’s like the walking dead, don’t care if I hurt someone or not.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top