Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11  
    CU's Tallest Midget! PoliCon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh PA
    Posts
    25,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Kay View Post
    They say it came down to only one lone holdout.
    Just one person hung the jury on the other 23 counts.
    That's the one that must have been paid off. Story here:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...ummoned-court/
    It only takes one hold out to hang a jury. The fact that there was only one makes it clear that that person was either paid off - or is a partisan who would happily ignore any and all evidence.
    Stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,838
    Quote Originally Posted by lacarnut View Post
    I did not think he would be found guilty on any counts because the Prosecutor is a political hack. Blago was tried in his home town which gives him a slight advantage. Why did the prosecutor charge him with 24 counts? When you go over the top like that, it diminishes the prosecution case in my opinion. If he would have been charged with 3 or 4 counts, it would have made the jurors job much easier. If he had been convicted of the most serious charges, he would have been looking at 20 to 40 years. BTW, I think Blago is a liar and a crook.
    I agree with his.

    Honestly, if I was sitting on a jury on a case like this and the prosecution went through like 20 overblown nonsense charges and 4 valid ones, I might just be obstinate to send a message that federal prosecutors need to only bring charges that are actually reasonable. Instead of making it be about legal rhetoric and the shotgun approach. I really hate lawyers, especially lawyers that work for the government because their "unlimited budget" is my tax dollars.:p
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,970
    Quote Originally Posted by m00 View Post
    I agree with his.

    Honestly, if I was sitting on a jury on a case like this and the prosecution went through like 20 overblown nonsense charges and 4 valid ones, I might just be obstinate to send a message that federal prosecutors need to only bring charges that are actually reasonable. Instead of making it be about legal rhetoric and the shotgun approach. I really hate lawyers, especially lawyers that work for the government because their "unlimited budget" is my tax dollars.:p
    Same here. Ex Governor of Louisiana, Edwin Edwards, was tried several times by over zealous prosecutors who brought a bunch of charges against him. They finally got him on the third or fourth try. His crookedness would put Blago to shame. The federal prosecutor screwed it up by bringing so many charges up. Also, when a prosecutor shows a hatred for the accused, that does not go over big with the jurors.

    I don't think that a juror was bought off. I was on a rape and armed robbery trial where the evidence was overwhelming. A retired teacher was hesitant in finding him guilty because she did not want him to spend the rest of his life in prison without the chance of parole. We convinced her our duty was to determine guilt or innocence. The judge handled the sentencing part not us. You get some whiny ass liberal as a juror and this kind of thing can happen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,156
    I called this when he was indicted by Fitzgerald , he didn't have the evidence.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Zoomie djones520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    10,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Satanicus View Post
    I called this when he was indicted by Fitzgerald , he didn't have the evidence.
    You said one juror would have their head up there ass and would deadlock 23 of 24 counts?

    Well look at that, it's raining gold bricks.

    Blago is still guilty boy. Now they just have to do a retrial to get the rest of the counts finished.
    In most sports, cold-cocking an opposing player repeatedly in the face with a series of gigantic Slovakian uppercuts would get you a multi-game suspension without pay.

    In hockey, it means you have to sit in the penalty box for five minutes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,156
    Quote Originally Posted by djones520 View Post
    Now they just have to do a retrial to get the rest of the counts finished.
    Ya, ok ...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Zoomie djones520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    10,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Satanicus View Post
    Ya, ok ...
    Guess you missed the part where the prosecuter said he was going to push for a retrial.

    And Blago is still guilty.
    In most sports, cold-cocking an opposing player repeatedly in the face with a series of gigantic Slovakian uppercuts would get you a multi-game suspension without pay.

    In hockey, it means you have to sit in the penalty box for five minutes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    CU's Tallest Midget! PoliCon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh PA
    Posts
    25,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Satanicus View Post
    I called this when he was indicted by Fitzgerald , he didn't have the evidence.
    Wow. There's nothing you won't defend when it's a leftist who's guilty is there. I'll bet you think Rangol is innocent too don't ya.
    Stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,970
    Quote Originally Posted by djones520 View Post
    Guess you missed the part where the prosecuter said he was going to push for a retrial.

    And Blago is still guilty.
    The government spent 20 million and could get only one conviction. Like I said, the prosecutor screwed the pooch by bringing so many counts. Spending another 20 million will result in another hung jury.

    Blago is guilty but so is members of Obama's Administration. Some people might think that is not fair to send him to jail and others like Rambo E. skate free.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Satanicus View Post
    I called this when he was indicted by Fitzgerald , he didn't have the evidence.
    I believe that you predicted acquittal on all counts. And given that the jury deadlock was 11-1 across the board on the other charges, it's pretty obvious that the prosecutors did have the evidence, but that the lone holdout l was either completely incapable of examining the evidence, or was tampered with. As stated in the article:

    News broke later Tuesday that there was just one holdout juror blocking a conviction on the charge of trying to sell the Senate seat. The jury deadlocked 11-1 on that charge, according to another juror, Erik Sarnello of Itasca, Ill.

    Sarnello, 21, said the holdout, a woman, "just didn't see what we all saw." He said the counts around the Senate seat were "the most obvious."
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •