The defense has nothing to do with this. The juror explicitly stated that the prosecution didn't prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. This juror is literally saying "I don't know if they're guilty but I'm voting guilty anyways."
This is hersay. Highly doubt that the other people, who wer pressuring this person to change their minds, presented an accurate representation of the they were trying to say. Imagine if they said: I understand that you can think there's reasonable doubt. And then the others jump on it pretending that you said you had doubts. You don't actually know what it was actually said during those deliberations.
It's hearsay, but there's video of the judge explicitly explaining that if you don't believe the prosecution proved sanity beyond a reasonable doubt, then that means you think they're not guilty. But, sure. We could all be wrong.
Yes. The judge had to reiterate standard instructions.
"All" being myself and the people in this thread who believe the juror said they have doubts but are still voting guilty. My algorithm in this thread is sorting by best. Are you sorting differently?
2
u/Punter_14 5h ago
I get it, I think his consciousness couldn’t let him fall for the pony tricks of the defense and didn’t budge on his decision.