Jurors don’t have to be unanimous to reach a guilty verdict in some states. That really seems odd to me.
I was today years old when I learned
- Thread starter jethreauxdawg
- Start date
- Status
I've never heard of that in criminal cases. In civil cases that is the way it is everywhere, and it shouldn't be.
You learned something that isn’t true. The originator of that statement has already backtracked but it’s too late. Already spreading like wildfire
With the 6th and 5th violation this will be expedited and overturned. Not a normal situation. It will be fix faster than normal. Also, his campaign will raise 10 to 20 million dollars over night. Biden may not know it but he just officially lost the election. Black males and independents will turn on him.
Thats what I figured. In this case it didn't matter. The jury was polled, it was unanimous.
I believe until very recently, Louisiana could convict you of murder with 10 outta 12.
Could be, dunno. But in this case specific instructions were that each count had to have a unanimous verdict.
It has to be unanimous the he was guilty but they didn’t have to unanimously agree as to what the underlying crime was. So one juror could be believe he falsified business records to commit tax fraud and the other could believe he did it to influence an election. This is how they were instructed by the judge. This also seems to be reversible error but they won’t even get that far down the error list.
Not sure how the “why” matters. Falsifying business records is falsifying business records. The reason is irrelevant except as to demonstrate intent was there.
- Status
Get unlimited access today.