User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 9:34:35 PM EDT
[#1]
He could have escaped without killing anyone, he went out of his way to kill people.
I may have wanted to escape, but I would not kill innocent people. Nor would I suggest it was somehow justified. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 9:35:01 PM EDT
[#2]
A unanimous vote to aquit sets you free. 11 to 1 to aquit is a hung jury. There is no room for debate on the verdict. Either eveyone thinks he is innocent, or everyone thinks he is guilty. Anything less IS a mistrial.
I have never heard of a judge overruling a juries verdict. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 9:41:12 PM EDT
[#3]
OK,,,maybe I misunderstood the rules on jury decisions. I had thought you didn`t need an unanimous for less that murder trials. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 9:48:37 PM EDT
[#4]
It is my understanding that all jury verdicts must be unanimous. I think that not having unanimous decisions would open the door for a huge number of appeals, using the logic that even the jury wasn't convinced of someone's guilt.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 9:50:31 PM EDT
[#5]
not murdering innocent people.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 9:51:34 PM EDT
[#6]
perhaps murdering innocent people |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 9:52:45 PM EDT
[#7]
If it was my daughter in Florida, i would agree to let her be.
i wouldnt want to be a vegetable nor would I want my daughter to have to suffer through that. pro-choice all the way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 9:53:14 PM EDT
[#8]
A judge can throw out a jury verdict if he believes there was improper conduct on the part of one or more jurors. In this case I heard a reference to a racial equital. Black jury members simply refusing to convict.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 9:54:21 PM EDT
[#9]
? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 10:05:12 PM EDT
[#10]
:unsure: the case in Florida of the woman who has brain damage......and the husband wants to take her off, but the judge wont let it happen....? havent heard of this? :unsure: :unsure: |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2005 10:18:01 PM EDT
[#11]
He should be tortured.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 4:23:48 AM EDT
[#12]
I think but you have it wrong The woman ends up brain damaged...docs still not sure why. Husband sues for money lands about 1.5 mil..gets experts to say that she is unsavable and should be put down. Judge agrees with paid experts family has been fighting judge and husband for 10+years. sounds fishy to me  |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 4:43:06 AM EDT
[#13]
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 4:51:53 AM EDT
[#14]
In some jurisdictions the jury votes on sentencing and only the death penalty would require a unanimous vote so perhaps that was what caused your confusion...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 5:09:47 AM EDT
[#15]
When I was much younger and more naive, I used to think that if the police arrested someone that they must have done something wrong and were at some level guilty.
Why was it so difficult for the jury to come to a consensus about Nichols' guilt? Either he tied up his girlfriend and raped her or he didn't. What are we missing from this story? Yeah, OJ was found not guilty, but there is still something missing here. If I wasn't guilty of a crime but was looking at the ass-end of a life sentence in a Georgia State prison (or any state prison for that matter) then I don't know what I would do. But I think it would be naive for anyone to say that they would not potentially reach their 'breaking point'. We all have one and I have seen otherwise psychiatrically robust individuals behave in very irrational and unpredictable ways when confronted with stress at the extremes of normal human experience. Behind every desperate act you will find a desperate man. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 5:21:04 AM EDT
[#16]
Never underestimate the potential stupidity of 12 people picked at random. Half of Americans expect CSI type evidence and a Law and Order type trial complete with tons of drama and a on-stand confession. The concept of "beyond a reasonable doubt" has been perverted by defense attys and the popular media. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 5:38:31 AM EDT
[#17]
It's called a "judgement notwithstanding the verdict," and it is a possible but rare occurance in some states. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 5:39:05 AM EDT
[#18]
I didn't realize that jury verdicts must be unanimous. I always figured if one person voted "not-guilty" then the defendant was acquitted. Guess I was wrong.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 5:44:26 AM EDT
[#19]
So you are saying you thought one person could cause a "not guilty" but a "guilty" required a unanimous vote? Seriously? Perry Mason? High School civics? A&E? Good Lord, no one would go to jail like that! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 5:55:10 AM EDT
[#20]
if i was innocent and justice was thwarted, i would make a run for it.
innocent people being killed? no - no need to add murder to the rape charges. as far as Schiavo in florida - she's not on anything to take her off of - other than starving her/dehydrating her to death. i have seen many individuals who were as responsive as her and on feeding tubes. there are doctors who insist she can be rehabbed to a "better" condition. if i was her Dad, i wouild not stop until all means were exhausted to keep her alive. the husband can divorce her, i would assume. howver if they are divorced, he has no access to any further $$$ she might be eligible to for "care". much of what was awarded to begin with didn't go for her care anyway. it was used for "other" purposes by the husband. if i had to, as her father, i would spirit her out of the hospital to somewhere safer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 6:03:27 AM EDT
[#21]
there should be some way to sensure the jury members if this is really happening. you would think that people who would do that would be de-selected during the jury selection process. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 6:14:39 AM EDT
[#22]
I don't have cable and don't watch the few channels I DO get. I'm either working, busy with football, or hanging out with my family. Sorry. ETA: Or hanging out here. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 6:24:33 AM EDT
[#23]
Correct in this jurisdiction. It was a hung jury and therefore a mistrial as the judge declared. Depending on the laws in a jurisdiction, a judge actually can set aside a verdict if it flies in the face of the facts as the judge sees them. But, again, it depends. And, the judge's ruling would then be subject to appeal and review. In this case, it would seem that the judge's ruling was relatively routine. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 6:29:11 AM EDT
[#24]
The judge didn't just decide that he didn't like the verdict. He was just following the law. Your assumption that only murder trials require a unanimous verdict was incorrect. The judical system was working just as it was supposed to work. An uncivilized savage killed four people. He should now get some REAL justice. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 6:29:33 AM EDT
[#25]
I know you've experienced this infinitely more times than I have. The one experience I've had with a jury was when someone did his best (unsuccessfully) to try and get into my car to beat me up. He was charged with criminal threatening and convicted by a judge during the first trial--$500 fine and 60 days suspended. The man appealed and the jury found him not guilty. The irony was that he was a C.O. and taught anger management to inmates.  I guess from what you're saying it is not so surprising that even if the girlfriend was on the stand saying that Nichols tied her up and repeatedly raped her that the jury could still find him not guilty. Well, there should be ample evidence now to convict him of murder. Maybe. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 6:44:29 AM EDT
[#26]
What difference does it make. I ain't going easy. At least not if there is ANY choice in the matter.
If it were my wife I would not stop until she was allowed to die with some kind of dignity. But I know the score. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2005 7:20:59 AM EDT
[#27]
Nothing to do with the scenario in the first post, but sort of fits with the thread title...
A friend attending a police academy told me about something one of his instructors --a Sergeant with a local PD-- said: "There are no bad arrests; just bad paperwork." That's the sort of attitude that can result in a man making a life's work out of the misery, degradation, humiliation, downfall and repudiation of the officer responsible. I mean, if one was a certain type of person, was falsely/mistakenly arrested, then charged and convicted based on pencil-whipped and falsified documentation and evidence, had everything taken away that one had worked so hard for in one's life, what depths wouldn't one plumb in search of adequate payback? Just a thought. 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
