Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty

[dcbc 14,471]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

The parties could agree to it. But absent that, my experience has been judges not wanting the written record to replace the overall impression of the testimony of a witness. 

Right.  They're not sending it back there.  We respect the jury.  But we don't trust them with the record.

1 minute ago, Foggy Notion said:

As far as I can tell, that was a translation. All of the other references I’ve seen regarding the four questions from the jury have just referred to Pecker’s testimony regarding the Trump Tower meeting. 

Still telling about where their focus is, and I'll iterate, "He's cooked."

[tx 3 putt 76,905]

[Gil Bang 25,944]

 

[Gatorubet 30,211]

14 minutes ago, dcbc said:

He's cooked.

that level of specificity that hones in on what this case is exactly about may mean that one of the two lawyers on the panel is the chairperson - and is assembling information relevant to convince some wafflers. 

My response to the jury wanting more Pecker information is

“Conspiracy” is just a word that doesn’t mean anything.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

16 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

That moment is brutal to my lawyer brain and heart. 

Why would you get worked up?  You get paid either way.

[dcbc 14,471]

1 minute ago, Gatorubet said:

that level of specificity that hones in on what this case is exactly about may mean that one of the two lawyers on the panel is the chairperson - and is assembling information relevant to convince some wafflers. 

My response to the jury wanting more Pecker information is

“Conspiracy” is just a word that doesn’t mean anything.

I don't recall Pecker's testimony being as highly assailed as was Cohen's.  So I agree, the fact that that's where their focus lies is bad news for Individual Uno.

[Dahobbs 17,534]

2 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Why would you get worked up?  You get paid either way.

Not as a plaintiff attorney. 

[dcbc 14,471]

2 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Why would you get worked up?  You get paid either way.

Because some lawyers do, in fact, give a damn about their client's interests and want to do their best by them.

[Foosters 17,850]

1 minute ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Why would you get worked up?  You get paid either way.

What a dumb fucking question 

[tx 3 putt 76,905]

 

[Radical Larry 28,584]

2 hours ago, TexasHooch said:

Letterman is like the 7 year-old kid who lands a joke and then proceeds to hammer it 4 more times expecting the same response.

He must be a regular on the recruiting threads. 
 

Apologies for $9.95ing CR

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

2 minutes ago, Foosters said:

What a dumb fucking question 

It ain't like brisket was going to jail.

[C-Man 27,214]

√

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,869]

Just now, C-Man said:

√

I like that they have to stay there the whole time. Can't leave. Trapped, like a rat. Or a dog, as that shitstain would say.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Not as a plaintiff attorney. 

Cash money up front or pick better clients.

 

4 minutes ago, dcbc said:

Because some lawyers do, in fact, give a damn about their client's interests and want to do their best by them.

 

4 minutes ago, Foosters said:

What a dumb fucking question 

Jeesh you fuckers take yourselves way too seriously.

[Dahobbs 17,534]

3 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Cash money up front or pick better clients.

 

 

Jeesh you fuckers take yourselves way too seriously.

Pot, meet kettle.

[Macanudo 12,976]

1 hour ago, Jiggy-Z said:

You must have forgotten that most here are Longhorn fans.

You're saying we're used to disappointment?

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Pot, meet kettle.

whatev, Corky.

[Brisketexan 105,095]

22 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Why would you get worked up?  You get paid either way.

 

Also, I sometimes breathe through my eyelids in court.  And think about banging younger Susan Sarandon.

 

Edited May 29 by Brisketexan

[Pancho 44,757]

 

[Gatorubet 30,211]

42 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I hate when the jury asks questions, because you spend the whole time wondering "what does it mean?  Is it good for us?  Bad for us?"  And I have yet to figure it out.

Also, the highest heart rates of my entire life have immediately followed the two most stressful words in the English language: "jury's back."  Seriously.  That moment is brutal to my lawyer brain and heart.  Then, waiting for them as the go through the verdict form, and writing down their answers on your notepad, because you have to do SOMETHING, you can't just stare at them as it's read.

Young Gatorubet was trying my first federal court Jones Act case involving a failure to evacuate a jackup rig timely in the face of an advancing hurricane, and I was momentarily giddy when the jury sent out a note asking for Mr. Ubet’s damages chart with my recommended verdict damage numbers….

They came back 20 minutes later and asked if they gave my client money for medical care, how could they make sure he would actually use it for that?

We had a bit of a convicted felon problem with my plaintiff and a dash of lying about surveillance and such.

Tldr, Gator did not get his requested damages.  Jury will ask questions to get your hopes up only to crush them.

[BamaATL 16,593]

So people that are insisting that there will be some sort of hung jury is pretty amusing to me.  What you'd have to believe is that an elected prosecutor took a case to the grand jury against a President without being 100% sure they'd get a conviction.  It may not be every charge, but my goodness, no political figure would dare do this without being 100% convinced.  

[Gatorubet 30,211]

29 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Not as a plaintiff attorney. 

[softlynow 1,814]

58 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I hate when the jury asks questions, because you spend the whole time wondering "what does it mean?  Is it good for us?  Bad for us?"  And I have yet to figure it out.

Also, the highest heart rates of my entire life have immediately followed the two most stressful words in the English language: "jury's back."  Seriously.  That moment is brutal to my lawyer brain and heart.  Then, waiting for them as the go through the verdict form, and writing down their answers on your notepad, because you have to do SOMETHING, you can't just stare at them as it's read.

When the jury asks, "what's longer, 99 years or life in prison" there's little doubt as to how it's going.

[Gatorubet 30,211]

oh fuckity-fuck.  The jury also asked that the jury instructions be read again.

That would be good for the defense.

I think I jinxed this thing with my jury note story post

[dcbc 14,471]

4 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

oh fuckity-fuck.  The jury also asked that the jury instructions be read again.

That would be good for the defense.

I think I jinxed this thing with my jury note story post

[Jiggy-Z 3,432]

31 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

You're saying we're used to disappointment?

What do you expect when a national championship in every sport is the anticipated outcome.

[Brisketexan 105,095]

5 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

oh fuckity-fuck.  The jury also asked that the jury instructions be read again.

That would be good for the defense.

I think I jinxed this thing with my jury note story post

1) you and I both know that could mean any of 100 different things.

2) just be like me: expect the worst (acquittal), and never be disappointed.

We don't deserve anything good, this timeline has made it clear.  I don't know why any of y'all waste any time hoping for anything good.  Anything good we get is entirely accidental and pure lagniappe in this timeline.

[Dahobbs 17,534]

9 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

oh fuckity-fuck.  The jury also asked that the jury instructions be read again.

That would be good for the defense.

I think I jinxed this thing with my jury note story post

Well, they were not given a written copy of the instructions, which is insane to me for this complex of a case. I'm not surprised at all they asked them to be read again. 

Edited May 29 by Dahobbs

[Gatorubet 30,211]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

.2) just be like me: expect the worst (acquittal), and never be disappointed.

I tried to get seppuku insurance for my part of the ledge, but I’m priced out now. 

[Gatorubet 30,211]

6 minutes ago, dcbc said:

[Biff Tannen 45,673]

38 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

Also, I sometimes breathe through my eyelids in court.  And think about banging younger Susan Sarandon.

 

Older Susan Sarandon with much larger tracts of land will do as well.

[softlynow 1,814]

16 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

So people that are insisting that there will be some sort of hung jury is pretty amusing to me.  What you'd have to believe is that an elected prosecutor took a case to the grand jury against a President without being 100% sure they'd get a conviction.  It may not be every charge, but my goodness, no political figure would dare do this without being 100% convinced.  

Juries are wild animals in and of themselves.

I had a sexual assault case hang up because 1 juror misheard testimony regarding yoga pants. 11 to convict. The other 11 looked totally beaten down that they couldn't convince her that she'd misheard the testimony.

A jury a colleague had for his trial somehow had an 18 year old on the panel who fell asleep constantly during the trial. He was the only one who didn't vote to convict.

My partner had a jury hang up on a bank robbery solely because the prosecutor inavertently insulted a woman during jury selection, and felt it was the only way to "have her voice heard."

I had one jury write on the jury form that they thought the charges were totally unjust, and the case should've been dismissed . . . directly below the signature of the presiding juror finding my client guilty. And a corporate attorney was the presiding jury. The judge was pissed.

This jury can easily fuck this up, and it could be for a bizarre reason Stephen King couldn't dream up.

[Dahobbs 17,534]

Actually, I don't even know how a jury reaches a verdict without a written copy of the instructions.  This is completely foreign to me. 

[Gatorubet 30,211]

When the jury reconvenes tomorrow morning, witness testimony and jury instructions will be read again as they continue deliberations. 

Reading the testimony to the jury should take 30 minutes. It is not yet clear whether the jury wants to hear the instructions in their entirety, and the judge will clear that up tomorrow.

['stache 21,802]

It sounds to me like there are some who don't really understand the standards and others are trying to inform them why they're voting the way they are. Of course that could go either way, but probably majority leaning guilty. That said, I have very little experience trying criminal cases against ex-presidents for business crimes involving paying off porn stars they banged.

[Doc Sam Beckett 5,792]

3 minutes ago, softlynow said:

Juries are wild animals in and of themselves.

I had a sexual assault case hang up because 1 juror misheard testimony regarding yoga pants. 11 to convict. The other 11 looked totally beaten down that they couldn't convince her that she'd misheard the testimony.

A jury a colleague had for his trial somehow had an 18 year old on the panel who fell asleep constantly during the trial. He was the only one who didn't vote to convict.

My partner had a jury hang up on a bank robbery solely because the prosecutor inavertently insulted a woman during jury selection, and felt it was the only way to "have her voice heard."

I had one jury write on the jury form that they thought the charges were totally unjust, and the case should've been dismissed . . . directly below the signature of the presiding juror finding my client guilty. And a corporate attorney was the presiding jury. The judge was pissed.

This jury can easily fuck this up, and it could be for a bizarre reason Stephen King couldn't dream up.

Well that's terrifying 

[hornmpa96 2,618]

Is it normal to not provide the instructions to the jury in writing?

That sounds completely nuts.

[Gatorubet 30,211]

3 minutes ago, softlynow said:

Juries are wild animals in and of themselves.

I had a sexual assault case hang up because 1 juror misheard testimony regarding yoga pants. 11 to convict. The other 11 looked totally beaten down that they couldn't convince her that she'd misheard the testimony.

A jury a colleague had for his trial somehow had an 18 year old on the panel who fell asleep constantly during the trial. He was the only one who didn't vote to convict.

My partner had a jury hang up on a bank robbery solely because the prosecutor inavertently insulted a woman during jury selection, and felt it was the only way to "have her voice heard."

I had one jury write on the jury form that they thought the charges were totally unjust, and the case should've been dismissed . . . directly below the signature of the presiding juror finding my client guilty. And a corporate attorney was the presiding jury. The judge was pissed.

This jury can easily fuck this up, and it could be for a bizarre reason Stephen King couldn't dream up.

When I was a bailiff, I had what looks like a slam dunk rape trial where two women hung the jury by voting not guilty because they said: “no woman would answer her door wearing that”.  

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,581]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

 

 

[YGIFS 19,450]

1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

What was the gameshow where you'd have to click the buzzer to avoid the whammy guy?  

[Gatorubet 30,211]

4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

It sounds to me like there are some who don't really understand the standards and others are trying to inform them why they're voting the way they are. Of course that could go either way, but probably majority leaning guilty. That said, I have very little experience trying criminal cases against ex-presidents for business crimes involving paying off porn stars they banged.

Yeah, I read it as possible evidence of some holdouts and an effort to convert them. 

The problem being

 

[softlynow 1,814]

2 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

When I was a bailiff, I had what looks like a slam dunk rape trial where two women hung the jury by voting not guilty because they said: “no woman would answer her door wearing that”.  

Yep. That we are hoping that one or more juries help us beat this fucker in November is very much a concern. Voters are stupid. Juries are just a small sampling of that stupidity.

[Brisketexan 105,095]

2 minutes ago, softlynow said:

Yep. That we are hoping that one or more juries help us beat this fucker in November is very much a concern. Voters are stupid. Juries are just a small sampling of that stupidity.

"Would you like to put your fate in the hands of 12 people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty?" is often a fair sales pitch to get your client on board with settlement.

[NAVY 6,740]

5 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Yeah, I read it as possible evidence of some holdouts and an effort to convert them. 

The problem being

 

… And wasn’t using them anyhow

[BamaATL 16,593]

9 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

What was the gameshow where you'd have to click the buzzer to avoid the whammy guy?  

Press your luck

[Goredho 17,399]

1 hour ago, Snake Diggity said:

The earliest possible solution to the Trump problem is if he loses this fall, but far more likely not until he dies, which could be a decade or more away.

I think there is a non-insignificant chance that the next President, regardless of whether its Biden or Trump, is assassinated in 2025.

[The Original Greaser Bob 2,830]

another question just came in from the jury:

Are we permitted to award an amount greater than the amount the Plaintiff asked for?

[immamac 42,839]

2 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

another question just came in from the jury:

Are we permitted to award an amount greater than the amount the Plaintiff asked for?

What? That doesn't even make sense. 

[YGIFS 19,450]

Just now, BamaATL said:

Press your luck

Yep  thank you.  and there's a buzzer to tell another game show host to shut up or he doesn't get to be President again.  And Chuck Woolery moved into my cousin's my neighborhood in the hill country and exchanged MAGA flags.  And Pat Sajak is hanging out with Marjorie Taylor Greene for pro-MAGA fundraisers.  And suddenly Jackie Rodger Junior's $100,000 jackpot wad is the most sane gameshow host in existence.  What in the flying fuck is going on here?  He was a fucking gameshow host.  Then became President to spite Seth Meyers and we're all gonna have to live underground next year because some young people didn't "turn out the vote" over Gaza?  It's not a simulation.  It's not Lobo hyperbole.  We brought this on ourselves.