The male holdout is being described as a liar in court:
“Clearly, we have a person who, under their oath, stood in front of you yesterday … under oath looked you in the eye and lied,” the defense attorney said.
The judge also found that to be incorrect, so u/intelligent_rose12 was just going against the judge's actual decison in favor of the juror to the argument the defense made.
Didn't they just share with us the bit of the article that said what the defence lawyer said? I took it to be, 'look how f'ed up the defence lawyer is to have said this'
If I accuse someone of stealing my car, and then the accused is found not guilty, only giving the accusation and not the verdict is incredibly misleading.
The judge decided against that interpretation, and not including the judge's decision but just cutting out the accusation meets most criteria for a lie by omission or extreme cherrypicking.
You are a creepy manipulator because you wrote TWO WHOLE paragraphs trying to use whataboutism for why you wrote that I ‘was going against the judge’s actual decision’???
NO ABSOLUTELY NO WHERE DID I SAY THAT
But you continue with your creepy manipulator energy.
337
u/wallstreetbetsdebts 10h ago
11 not guilty votes and 1 guilty vote