DocCec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yes. She works with mentally disturbed children, and repeatedly remarked
during deliberations that she was drawing on her own experience. Other jurors
report frustration at her unwillingness to consider the evidence outside the
light of her own experience, but could not sway her. BTW, she did not explain
exactly what it was she did for a living when she went through voir dire --
listed herself as something fairly innocuous and irrelevant. Pros says if
they had known they'd never have accepted her as a juror.
Doc
<< Has the holdout told anyone why they couldn't vote for conviction?
DocCec wrote:
>
> DocCec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> After three weeks of trial and five days of deliberation, this finally
ended
> today in a mistrial. Jury was 11-1 for guilty, but couldn't convince the
> holdout. Pros says they will retry, but time will tell.
> I'm sorry to see the end of the only thing that has managed to keep the
> Lewinsky nonsense off the evening news for five blissful days!
> Doc
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
