The idea that 11 of 12 jurors were set to vote NOT-GUILTY with one man holding out was the interpretation from defense attorney Kevin Reddington of the jury foreperson's note passed to Judge William Sullivan claiming that the holdout was not following the law. State Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague disputed that interpretation. She argued the court could not know whether the holdout misunderstood reasonable doubt or whether the other jurors did. The Judge ultimately concluded that the information before him showed a disagreement arising from deliberations. The lawyers nor the Judge had any idea what the jury's verdict almost was or wasn't. For all we know it could have been 11 GUILTY, and one woke male refusing to budge on NOT-GUILTY.Continuing to perpetuate the "lone hero gritting his teeth against the woke mob" story is comforting to the mind, but it is nothing more than a fantasy proposed by Clancy's lawyer to whom a favorable outcome hypothesis is not surprising in the least.No one except those 12 jurors actually knew which verdict the holdout supported.
>>542233223this thought crossed my mind tooofc they're no longer legally obligated to not learn about or discuss the case or their role on the juryany one of them could tell the story to the papers if that were the caseI'd be prone to believing it if it wasn't for that having not happened yet
Oh thank hoodness, a Lindsay Clancy thread.
>>542233223The 'reasonable doubt' discussion was relevant because Massachusetts has retarded laws around the insanity defense. In most other states the defense has to prove insanity; in Massachusetts the prosecution has to prove sanity.
>>542233223I suppose technically we don't know in a one-for-one sense, but it's strongly implied and what's being reported, because the juror note and defense moving to remove the one juror, was regarding the fact the juror recognized doubt but did not believe it reasonable / would not apply it as justification for acquittal.least that's what I've seen everywhere
>>542233223>The idea that 11 of 12 jurors were set to vote NOT-GUILTY isn't known10 and 3/5 jurors, anon
>>542235415plus the judge's little 'thank you' speech to the jurors implied it as well.
one of the female jurors wore rainbow faggot tranny shit. you can guarantee what she voted for for and we know it was a man who was the old out so you can reason that it was 11 voting not guilty
>>542233223Reddington was blatantly manipulating public opinion with his remarks. We can do the same, we have our hero and your pathetic nagging wouldn't change this fact. Reddington should have known better, you too.
>>542234862The only one of its kind. A thread dedicated to truth, not memes or time-wasting pointless discussions.
>>542235063Correct
>>542233223OP Here.Let's also realize that defense attorney Reddington identified the gender of the holdout juror as male, which is a serious breach of court ethics. Jurors are supposed to be anonymous at all times and his comments nailed the holdout juror down to 1 of 3 people. I personally believe he did this to add fuel to the court of public opinion, as Clancy supporters no doubt seized on it and started claiming an evil man who "doesn't understand what women go through" was preventing the "correct" verdict from being reached.
>>542238682>a serious breach of court ethics>he did this to add fuelabsolutely, but i'm sure he'll claim that knowledge was already public based on the jury foreman's statement
>>542235415>>542235501Great post. I'd argue back and state no one outside the jury room knows what happened inside it. The judge and the lawyers had the foreperson’s notes and nothing else. On the jury foreperson's note the State prosecutor argued that the court could not know whether the holdout misunderstood reasonable doubt or whether the other jurors did. The Judge ultimately concluded that the information before him showed a disagreement arising from deliberations, not a basis for removing the juror. The note did not establish the verdict reached by any of the jurors.Defense attorney Reddington may have *felt* like the jury was on his side, and he was essentially gambling on that assumption when he requested juror removal in favor of an alternate. The court of public opinion does have an impact.
>>542233223If chuds keep causing mistrials then she will walk, run and jump free because these cases cost millions of dollars and the state can’t keep trying her forever.
>>542240244it'd only cost $1 to solve this once and for all
>>542239764>Defense attorney Reddington may have *felt* like the jury was on his side, and he was essentially gambling on that assumption when he requested juror removal in favor of an alternate. The court of public opinion does have an impact.Go to bed Candace
>>542240440She's so beautiful. Classy, intelligent, sexy. Feeling her pussy just eat my cock up as she bounces up and down on my shaft would be heaven on earth.
>>542235455Lmao I see you bud
>>542241847I jerk of to your words. They got my dick so hard I can’t think. I will be putting it in your leaf asshole.
>>542238682>OP Here.You've an ID, we know you're OP.
>>542241847>She's so beautiful.nigger please
>>542233223https://youtube.com/shorts/J0B5PFwG58A?si=LjqCSF3rWbuHdKdwThey're already running their big fat noses, I mean mouths, bitching about it.
>>542235063insane until proven sane kek what a fucking jewish state
>>542242090I know you have never been with a woman because 99% of women look like that in the morning without make up on. You goon too much.>>542242216It was one of the original 13 colonies dude show some fucking respect.
>>542243266Those are lies your mother told you so you wouldn't pull out before she finished. Now you'll have to excuse me while I go back to fucking my wife.
>>542235063Does it matter though? As long as a juror frames his decision within the legal criteria which isn’t hard to do, i.e "sorry, defense/prosecution wasn't convincing enough for me" there's nothing anyone can do.And i guess this is what the defense was gambling on as a last resort by asking the court to interrogate the juror, had he slipped and expressed defiance to the judge’s instructions in an unorthodox manner he’d be dismissed.
