ADVERTISEMENT

Meanwhile in the MAL documents case...

I think everything you say is true w/r/t juries, especially in criminal trials.

The difference here is Trump. He's probably sui generis, the most polarizing political figure of my lifetime. MAGA people LOVE him, think he's the only person who can save the country from communism/deep state/etc.. Partisans on the Left HATE him, think he's like Hitler, will end democracy as we know it in this country and is a monster.

In most of the country, it's probably impossible for him to get a fair trial, in either direction, no matter how sincere the judge or how hard they vet the jury pool.
You get four out of five counties red in that part of the country you’re going to get a couple dbm’s Danc’s joe, etc and jury nullification. Trump is already a convicted felon and half the country doesn’t care. Yeah we believe what the evidence shows but we think he’s picked on here and the prosecution is unjust. Bam. THE FORT HAS SPOKEN
 
You get four out of five counties red in that part of the country you’re going to get a couple dbm’s Danc’s joe, etc and jury nullification. Trump is already a convicted felon and half the country doesn’t care. Yeah we believe what the evidence shows but we think he’s picked on here and the prosecution is unjust. Bam. THE FORT HAS SPOKEN
#DreamTeamJustice

Very possible. Although in the documents case, it’s going to be tough.
 
#DreamTeamJustice

Very possible. Although in the documents case, it’s going to be tough.
Trump really lucked out getting fort Pierce which pulls from red north counties. Mar a lago is super close to the wpb division. That division only pulls from pbc. purple but a bit more Dem. Transients. People from all over. All types etc. Fort Lauderdale only broward. Miami only Dade. Both heavy blue
 
I think everything you say is true w/r/t juries, especially in criminal trials.

The difference here is Trump. He's probably sui generis, the most polarizing political figure of my lifetime. MAGA people LOVE him, think he's the only person who can save the country from communism/deep state/etc.. Partisans on the Left HATE him, think he's like Hitler, will end democracy as we know it in this country and is a monster.

In most of the country, it's probably impossible for him to get a fair trial, in either direction, no matter how sincere the judge or how hard they vet the jury pool.
He's definitely unique. And polarizing, although there are tens of millions who fall somewhere between the extremes you've identified.

He clearly stresses the criminal justice system. Some of that, of course, is his own doing, with harsh and sometimes vitriolic criticism of the prosecutors, judges, judges' family members and witnesses in his cases. I'm recalling, for example, his social media post depicting a baseball bat by Bragg's head. There's an intimidation factor. There have been death threats. Jurors' anonymity is critically important for their safety and well-being. In some respects, his prosecutions resemble those of a mob boss.

So yeah, he's unique. But the criminal justice system can't be remade for unique defendants. They're subject to the same rules as everyone else. And he's not necessarily shit out of luck following his guilty verdict(s). If there's a colorable claim that, for example, he couldn't receive a fair trial in Manhattan, that will be addressed on appeal. If he and/or his defense team honestly believe he can't get a fair trial in most of the country, he may want to reconsider his citizenship and/or limit his future criminal activities to venues that are particularly friendly.
 
In most of the country, it's probably impossible for him to get a fair trial, in either direction, no matter how sincere the judge or how hard they vet the jury pool.
On the contrary, I would say that in virtually ALL of the country it is impossible for him to get an unfair criminal trial, a conviction that requires a unanimous verdict of 12 citizens. Even in isolated areas like Manhattan that break 80-20 against him at the polls, there would be only a 7% chance that none of the 12 would be a Trump supporter. In places that are still so-called solid blue areas and going 60-40 against him, there would be only a 0.2% chance that none of the 12 would be a Trump supporter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory
On the contrary, I would say that in virtually ALL of the country it is impossible for him to get an unfair criminal trial, a conviction that requires a unanimous verdict of 12 citizens. Even in isolated areas like Manhattan that break 80-20 against him at the polls, there would be only a 7% chance that none of the 12 would be a Trump supporter. In places that are still so-called solid blue areas and going 60-40 against him, there would be only a 0.2% chance that none of the 12 would be a Trump supporter.
doesn't work like that
 
On the contrary, I would say that in virtually ALL of the country it is impossible for him to get an unfair criminal trial, a conviction that requires a unanimous verdict of 12 citizens. Even in isolated areas like Manhattan that break 80-20 against him at the polls, there would be only a 7% chance that none of the 12 would be a Trump supporter. In places that are still so-called solid blue areas and going 60-40 against him, there would be only a 0.2% chance that none of the 12 would be a Trump supporter.
Did it work that way in the OJ murder trial?
 
Come on Mcm66, Vern is highly trained and more experienced than you. 😂
Not only is oj not a one off. Studies and research have been done re the importance of jury diversity for equity in verdicts. In Florida a 10 year study of felony trials was used for data

Bowl and brad are right most jurors are fair. The vast majority. But not all come with a clean state and the makeup of the co dictates same and you can’t weed them all out. There are willdogs out there. His beliefs would impact a trial - supported by data. Racial composition matters. People who believe in lawfare and will engage in nullification. Dbm joe DANC Bailey Cray and on and on right here. They aren’t convicting trump in those five counties. Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Not only is oj not a one off. Studies and research have been done re the importance of jury diversity for equity in verdicts. In Florida a 10 year study of felony trials was used for data

Bowl and brad are right most jurors are fair. The vast majority. But not all come with a clean state and the makeup of the co dictates same and you can’t weed them all out. There are willdogs out there. His beliefs would impact a trial - supported by data. Racial composition matters. People who believe in lawfare and will engage in nullification. Dbm joe DANC Bailey Cray and on and on right here. They aren’t convicting trump in those five counties. Just my opinion.
It’s sad that after sitting through a trial which could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to fair and objective jurors wouldn’t phase the people you listed. I think you are probably right and it’s really not a good thing.
 
It’s sad that after sitting through a trial which could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to fair and objective jurors wouldn’t phase the people you listed. I think you are probably right and it’s really not a good thing.
So in just our little corner of the world we have that many posters. Imagine how many feel that way in the heart of maga country in red Florida
 
Not only is oj not a one off. Studies and research have been done re the importance of jury diversity for equity in verdicts. In Florida a 10 year study of felony trials was used for data

Bowl and brad are right most jurors are fair. The vast majority. But not all come with a clean state and the makeup of the co dictates same and you can’t weed them all out. There are willdogs out there. His beliefs would impact a trial - supported by data. Racial composition matters. People who believe in lawfare and will engage in nullification. Dbm joe DANC Bailey Cray and on and on right here. They aren’t convicting trump in those five counties. Just my opinion.
Personally I don’t think you can find 12 jurors in any location in this country that will give Trump a fair unbiased verdict, either way. Sure Trump has hurt himself in many ways but media is a bigger problem.
 
Personally I don’t think you can find 12 jurors in any location in this country that will give Trump a fair unbiased verdict, either way. Sure Trump has hurt himself in many ways but media is a bigger problem.

So what is the answer? If Trump is so reviled that he can't get a fair trial, does he get a free pass?
 
Personally I don’t think you can find 12 jurors in any location in this country that will give Trump a fair unbiased verdict, either way. Sure Trump has hurt himself in many ways but media is a bigger problem.
My guess is that the two verdicts against trump will be the largest in NY for 2023. Of all verdicts. That caroll case. More than birth defects, wrongful death cases, etc. where a case is heard makes a huge difference. Throw in trump and it’s off the charts
 
Personally I don’t think you can find 12 jurors in any location in this country that will give Trump a fair unbiased verdict, either way. Sure Trump has hurt himself in many ways but media is a bigger problem.
How is media a bigger problem? Trump broke the law, Trump threatens and insults judges, courtroom employees, lawyers and anyone not protected by a gag order to attempt to bully them into doing what he wants. Has nothing to do with the media reporting on his vile behavior.

Given that all jurists on a jury have to agree, a decision will almost always require someone vote in opposition to their views on Trump. Even in NY, a jury isn't going to be entirely made of Trump haters.

It would be like if the jury had me and dbm on it. If we both agreed on trump's guilt or innocence then the evidence must have been pretty good even with 2 people with strong opinions on the defendent.
 
Personally I don’t think you can find 12 jurors in any location in this country that will give Trump a fair unbiased verdict, either way. Sure Trump has hurt himself in many ways but media is a bigger problem.
I’m taking the contrary view that Trump will be found guilty in the MAL case, even there in location which has more Trump voters than not. I’ve read the indictment (I recommend everyone here do so, and it’s an easy read) and the case is super strong. Probably about as close to slam dunk as I’ve seen. Put Aloha in there for Trump and Aloha’s going to prison for the rest of his life. Period. So let’s say the trial happens and the jury finds him guilty. What will our hard core MAGA Trumpsters say about it? Will they try to make the unsupportable assertion that the jury was full of Democrats and Nerver-Trumpers (gets my vote) or will they finally admit our former President is a felon (I wouldn’t bet a dollar on this one)?
 
How is media a bigger problem? Trump broke the law, Trump threatens and insults judges, courtroom employees, lawyers and anyone not protected by a gag order to attempt to bully them into doing what he wants. Has nothing to do with the media reporting on his vile behavior.

Given that all jurists on a jury have to agree, a decision will almost always require someone vote in opposition to their views on Trump. Even in NY, a jury isn't going to be entirely made of Trump haters.

It would be like if the jury had me and dbm on it. If we both agreed on trump's guilt or innocence then the evidence must have been pretty good even with 2 people with strong opinions on the defendent.
My god you are something else. There are no jurists on a jury. All JURORS do not have to agree.

Your bias is at issue in this entire thread
 
It’s America. Verdicts he disagrees with he can appeal. If he loses he loses and serves the sentences.
Isn't that exactly what Trump is doing?

People just want to pretend that Trump is some victim. Will that stop if he loses the appeal or will they keep pretending he is a victim of a biased jury and judges?
 
Isn't that exactly what Trump is doing?

People just want to pretend that Trump is some victim. Will that stop if he loses the appeal or will they keep pretending he is a victim of a biased jury and judges?
In New York he is the victim of a politically motivated prosecution and he is guilty.

In the so dist he sounds guilty but may benefit from the rotational system that kicked the case to fort Pierce. Cannon may be a beneficial draw as well

That’s where we are
 
How is media a bigger problem? Trump broke the law, Trump threatens and insults judges, courtroom employees, lawyers and anyone not protected by a gag order to attempt to bully them into doing what he wants. Has nothing to do with the media reporting on his vile behavior.

Given that all jurists on a jury have to agree, a decision will almost always require someone vote in opposition to their views on Trump. Even in NY, a jury isn't going to be entirely made of Trump haters.

It would be like if the jury had me and dbm on it. If we both agreed on trump's guilt or innocence then the evidence must have been pretty good even with 2 people with strong opinions on the defendent.
Not a chance in hell dbm would ever be convinced of Trump being guilty of anything. He checked out of reality and took up permanent residence in Trump World. Trump could change his name to Dorris and start wearing dresses and dbm would be the biggest supporter of the trans movement the WC has ever seen. He’s that far gone.
 
Not a chance in hell dbm would ever be convinced of Trump being guilty of anything. He checked out of reality and took up permanent residence in Trump World. Trump could change his name to Dorris and start wearing dresses and dbm would be the biggest supporter of the trans movement the WC has ever seen. He’s that far gone.
And if we believe there’s a cult they sure as shit will show up in that pool
 
In New York he is the victim of a politically motivated prosecution and he is guilty.

In the so dist he sounds guilty but may benefit from the rotational system that kicked the case to fort Pierce. Cannon may be a beneficial draw as well

That’s where we are
May be?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
Not a chance in hell dbm would ever be convinced of Trump being guilty of anything. He checked out of reality and took up permanent residence in Trump World. Trump could change his name to Dorris and start wearing dresses and dbm would be the biggest supporter of the trans movement the WC has ever seen. He’s that far gone.
He may be a bad example. Just saying it is highly unlikely for a jury, even in NY, to not have at least 1 pro-trumper with a red hat in their closet.

Or vice versa in a conservative area of the country
 
Not a chance in hell dbm would ever be convinced of Trump being guilty of anything. He checked out of reality and took up permanent residence in Trump World. Trump could change his name to Dorris and start wearing dresses and dbm would be the biggest supporter of the trans movement the WC has ever seen. He’s that far gone.
Not trying to pick a fight Aloha but I think you are as hard core against Trump as DBM is for Trump. I don’t think if you were on a jury you would be unbiased in your decision. That’s where we are with Trump.

Would I be unbiased? I don’t know. In the documents case it would be tuff for me knowing Biden and Hillary both walked. I don’t need to hear how much more egregious Trump’s case is. If Trump is guilty, they are both guilty of breaking the law and they walked away free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
Not trying to pick a fight Aloha but I think you are as hard core against Trump as DBM is for Trump. I don’t think if you were on a jury you would be unbiased in your decision. That’s where we are with Trump.

Would I be unbiased? I don’t know. In the documents case it would be tuff for me knowing Biden and Hillary both walked. I don’t need to hear how much more egregious Trump’s case is. If Trump is guilty, they are both guilty of breaking the law and they walked away free.
So bam there’s jury nullification in words. That’s why I don’t see him getting convicted in those counties
 
So what is the answer? If Trump is so reviled that he can't get a fair trial, does he get a free pass?

It’s America. Verdicts he disagrees with he can appeal. If he loses he loses and serves the sentences.

Thanks for the measured response.

So if Trump loses his appeal(s), you're good with that? Or is that just another example of the "system" being corrupt and rigged?
 
Not trying to pick a fight Aloha but I think you are as hard core against Trump as DBM is for Trump. I don’t think if you were on a jury you would be unbiased in your decision. That’s where we are with Trump.

Would I be unbiased? I don’t know. In the documents case it would be tuff for me knowing Biden and Hillary both walked. I don’t need to hear how much more egregious Trump’s case is. If Trump is guilty, they are both guilty of breaking the law and they walked away free.
Not everyone's bias will go the same way in a jury though. The chances of everyone being pro Trump or anti Trump is incredibly slim.

If an entire jury agrees on a verdict (which they have to) then wouldn’t you say the evidence must have been strong enough to overcome that bias?

Someone or multiple someones would have to vote opposite of their bias.
 
Not everyone's bias will go the same way in a jury though. The chances of everyone being pro Trump or anti Trump is incredibly slim.

If an entire jury agrees on a verdict (which they have to) then wouldn’t you say the evidence must have been strong enough to overcome that bias?

Someone or multiple someones would have to vote opposite of their bias.
Why do you keep writing that they have to agree? And do you understand jurists and jurors are different?
 
Not trying to pick a fight Aloha but I think you are as hard core against Trump as DBM is for Trump. I don’t think if you were on a jury you would be unbiased in your decision. That’s where we are with Trump.

Would I be unbiased? I don’t know. In the documents case it would be tuff for me knowing Biden and Hillary both walked. I don’t need to hear how much more egregious Trump’s case is. If Trump is guilty, they are both guilty of breaking the law and they walked away free.
I’m 100 percent confident I could be an objective juror and find him not guilty if that was warranted. There isn’t a doubt in my mind.

Once again, Trump’s case is magnitudes worse. This isn’t my opinion, it’s a fact. Many more documents, highest levels of classification, failing to properly protect them, refusal to return, lying that he had returned when he hadn’t, and actively obstructing their return. It’s not close. The only charge they could have against Biden is mishandling. None of the rest. Please read the indictment. Compare it to the Hur Report. That they’re not close to the same, again, is a fact, not an opinion.
 
Last edited:
I’m 100 percent confident I could be an objective juror and find him not guilty if that was warranted. There isn’t a doubt in my mind.

Once again, Trump’s case is magnitudes worse. This isn’t my opinion, it’s a fact. Many more documents, highest levels of classification, failing to properly protect them, refusal to return, lying that he had returned when he hadn’t, and actively obstructing their return. It’s not close. This, again, is a fact, not an opinion.
Did Trump, Biden and Hillary break the law in their documents cases?
 
I’m 100 percent confident I could be an objective juror and find him not guilty if that was warranted. There isn’t a doubt in my mind.

Once again, Trump’s case is magnitudes worse. This isn’t my opinion, it’s a fact. Many more documents, highest levels of classification, failing to properly protect them, refusal to return, lying that he had returned when he hadn’t, and actively obstructing their return. It’s not close. This, again, is a fact, not an opinion.
I would like to think I’d convict him but I’d certainly consider nullification. I don’t know how I’d feel about effectively disenfranchising half the country of their vote. The Republican nomination. That MIGHT feel bigger to me than his charges. I don’t know.

After the election I’d convict him without a thought. I don’t care about him
 
Not everyone's bias will go the same way in a jury though. The chances of everyone being pro Trump or anti Trump is incredibly slim.

If an entire jury agrees on a verdict (which they have to) then wouldn’t you say the evidence must have been strong enough to overcome that bias?

Someone or multiple someones would have to vote opposite of their bias.
McMurtry has been trying too explain that they don’t all have to agree. They can all agree guilty or not guilty or they could have a hung jury because they don’t all agree on either.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT