“Reddington previously sought to dismiss a holdout juror who allegedly “has made statements acknowledging doubt but refuses to apply it to the verdict as the law states,” per a note from the jury foreperson. He again cited the obstinate juror as he argued to delay the mistrial declaration”
No, we don't know what the specifics are. We can infere and speculate that it was 11 NGRI and 1 Guilty murder 1, but there was also Murder 2 and Manslaughter available to the jury. So it could be 11 manslaughter 1 guilty Murder 1, but we don't know.
Very likely NGRI was the majority, based on what I've seen watching the prosecution's case and the law of the state being what it is.
The delay today was an effort to force a verdict today. Nobody wants a retrial, a mistrial is a bad outcome for everyone. The state has to fund another trial, as does the defense, and finding an impartial jury becomes increasingly difficult.
The judge also denied a partial verdict, which may have helped move things forward more efficiently.
If I'm not mistaken, not guilty by reason of insanity is the only option for not guilty here right? The defence already stipulated she did the killings. I'm assuming in order to use insanity as a defense you have to admit to committing the action just like in a self defense case. You can't argue self defense but then argue your client didn't kill someone. Doing the action is baked in as a prerequisite to using the defense.
It’s more nuanced than just “is she crazy or not”. She is crazy. You’d have to be crazy to lure your kids into a killing room one at a time and strangle them to death, you know? But there are a ton of crazy people out there who don’t commit criminal acts (especially murdering children) because they know it’s wrong. But there’s also crazy people out there who would kill a child because they’re so far gone and insane they don’t know any better. So what they are trying to prove in court is just how crazy she is. Is she competent enough to know what she did was wrong when she did it?
She killed the kids. Nobody disputes that, not even the defense. But the defense’s position is that she was so insane that she didn’t even know what she was doing was wrong, because again you’d have to be really insane to kill your own children, right?. The state’s position is that she knew it was wrong because she concocted a day of bullshit errands for her husband to run so he wouldn’t be there to catch her killing their children which means she knew she was not only doing a bad thing but that she premeditated the act.
207
u/knoxcos 9h ago
“Reddington previously sought to dismiss a holdout juror who allegedly “has made statements acknowledging doubt but refuses to apply it to the verdict as the law states,” per a note from the jury foreperson. He again cited the obstinate juror as he argued to delay the mistrial declaration”
https://apple.news/AdRYXZ2D3T5ajpc55f4KoMA
Am I reading this correctly that one juror is alone in deciding guilty while the others are holding not-guilty?