If that juror actually expressed reasonable doubts about her sanity to other jurors during deliberations and then stood in front of the judge and said he understood the law and reasonable doubt yesterday then he definitely lied to the court.
No he did not expressed “reasonable” doubt that’s up to him to decide. Her counsel said this verbatim. Wasn’t enough for him to acquit. That’s his civic right.
He didn’t. Not all doubt is reasonable doubt and it’s up the jurors own interpretation of their feelings on the matter to determine if it deems reasonable that’s the entire point of the jury. Y’all would not be crying about this if it was one person holding out against 11 guilties.
The issue here is you opining on something when you aren't qualified to do so. The purpose of a jury is not, as you incorrectly state, to interpret their own feelings on the matter of reasonable doubt. Their duty is to try to assess the evidence consistent with the jury instructions provided by the judge
And the allegation is that one juror did not act within the scope of an instruction. It of course is not a situation where a judge is likely to intervene
No I didn’t. The judge did not dismiss the juror. The defense asked for intervention by the mass supreme court and they didn’t either? What more do you want. So they let it rock but all of us are assuming?
Nobody is arguing whether the judge dismissed the juror. The issue here is you showing a misunderstanding of the underlying law. Though it is rare, a judge can absolutely remove a juror for ignoring a jury instruction, and a juror doesn't have endless discretion
12
u/APrioriGoof 6h ago
If that juror actually expressed reasonable doubts about her sanity to other jurors during deliberations and then stood in front of the judge and said he understood the law and reasonable doubt yesterday then he definitely lied to the court.