Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

[OldMercsRule]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

" String him up! :| "

Novak right alongside! :|


Jimonica's point is, screw the spin, read the facts.
( Oops, there I go reading minds again. )

My point of posting this has escaped many responding. One would hope that the [colour=null]Prosecutor[/colour] would have a difficult time finding impartial jurors when dealing with public figures. One would hope that too many potential jurors would have reason to have too favorable of an opinion of the public figure to render fair judgement. Instead the Defense is having a difficult time finding potential jurors without such a visceral disdain of the administration in question to be able to render fair judgement. I'm sure Charlie Manson's defense team had similar problems to this defense team. That's a sad statement regarding the character of our current administration, no matter how one could spin it.

Thanks Jimonica, Now is it Jim or Monica? That said: someone says Monica is a hottie, could you post a pic? JR

 

[JB]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Hey, 12Footer.

No offense taken, Sir. I have been called worse, even by other posters to this thread, though not in this thread (yet).

Officially, I served as an Avionics Tech and Flight Radioman in a Navy Air Transport Squadron. One of my official duties was 1st. Flight Radioman on Admiral Stump's (CinCPac Fleet) crew. I spent the last 4 years of my Navy career as an Instructor. I had covert responsibilities to other government agencies.

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

" String him up! :| "

Novak right alongside! :|


Jimonica's point is, screw the spin, read the facts.
( Oops, there I go reading minds again. )

My point of posting this has escaped many responding. One would hope that the [colour=null]Prosecutor[/colour] would have a difficult time finding impartial jurors when dealing with public figures. One would hope that too many potential jurors would have reason to have too favorable of an opinion of the public figure to render fair judgement. Instead the Defense is having a difficult time finding potential jurors without such a visceral disdain of the administration in question to be able to render fair judgement. I'm sure Charlie Manson's defense team had similar problems to this defense team. That's a sad statement regarding the character of our current administration, no matter how one could spin it.

Now Willy, (I addressed your alter ego mind readin' in my last posted question), based on this post, (assuming you are speaking for yourself and projectin' those thoughts on Jim or Monica), you really do want politics criminalized don't you? If people can't respectfully particapate in our Constitutional Rebublic under the rules as established a little over 200 years ago we have real problems my friend and fellow American. Respectfully JR

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Hey Willy, If you were on the jury, DID OJ DO IT? Jus' wonderin' what your thoughts are. JR

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Dam right he did it! But then Furman had to go and take the stand. Wutta putz!

No offense 'bout the mind reading. This one was aimed at a few reiterations by others. I'll be good now.

 

[crunch]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Instead the Defense is having a difficult time finding potential jurors without such a visceral disdain of the administration in question to be able to render fair judgement.

Where do you get this stuff?

Walton hopes to have 36 qualified jurors by Thursday afternoon. Attorneys for both sides can then eliminate jurors for any reason until 12 jurors and four alternates are seated.

By Thursday morning, 24 potential jurors were in the pool. Seven administration critics were allowed into the pool Wednesday after they said they could set their political feeling aside.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/01/18/D8MNPHLO0.html

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Thanks for the article Crunchy. Here's your answer...

"... attorneys have successfully disqualified the harshest Bush opponents who said they could not be impartial. "

I appreciate your help in proving my point.


"Seven administration critics were allowed into the pool Wednesday after they said they could set their political feeling aside."

That just reeks of scraping the bottom of the barrel. Obviously they're running out of time and candidates. Then again, the scent of a book deal tempts even the prudent.

 

[crunch]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

I appreciate your help in proving my point.

So now you're going to flip flop and say your point was that the legal system is working like it should? I thought your point was...

Instead the Defense is having a difficult time finding potential jurors without such a visceral disdain of the administration in question to be able to render fair judgement. I'm sure Charlie Manson's defense team had similar problems to this defense team. That's a sad statement regarding the character of our current administration, no matter how one could spin it.

Do you even understand how jury selection works?

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

You're totally missing my point. Manson ... Bush. Famous or infamous? Time wasted on the blind-by-choice. I give up.

 

[crunch]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Oh, I got your point, it just doesn't make any sense.

 

[crunch]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Sometimes I'm a little slow Willy but I finally got it..... you don't want Libby to have a fair trial, you just want him convicted.

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Sometimes I'm a little slow Willy but I finally got it..... you don't want Libby to have a fair trial, you just want him convicted.

Hey Crunch, BINGO! Ya sure ya betcha.

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Why waste money?
He's guilty....
String the traitorous dog up! :|

 

[crunch]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Why waste money?
He's guilty....
String the traitorous dog up! :|

Thank you God.

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Why waste money?
He's guilty....
String the traitorous dog up! :|

Yeh Bro Haut, We didn't need to do any mind readin' on how you felt 'bout this, you allready said as much. JR ps you and WbW seem to agree a lot Bro Haut

 

[12Footer]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

Why waste money?
He's guilty....
String the traitorous dog up! :|

Yeah man.. who needs a trial? He don't need no stinkin trial. After all, this card is useless in his hands.

 

[PW2]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

No, 12Footer, I am not a lawyer.

However, I agree with you that an attorney can excuse a potential juror for any reason or for no reason and they do it all the time.

Any potential juror who admits to a prejudice should be and will be excused.

Say, OldMercs. On what basis do you claim that Ms. Plame was not a protected agent? I have only heard that the "leak" was illegal.

It is my opinion that "Scooter" will be aquitted. Absent mindedness may be annoying, but it is not illegal.

Only time will tell, JB, whether he will be aquitted.
At this point, we don't know the facts of the case.

If in fact, this was simply one issue out of hundreds Scooter and the VP's office was dealing with at the time, "Absent-mindedness" may well be a credible defense.

If it is shown that discrediting Wilson was Job 1 at the VP's office, and they were concentrating of that effort, "Absent-mindedness" may be a tough sell to a jury.

It's a tough thing to prove "Beyond a reasonable doubt" what was in someone's head as you have to do in cases of perjury, but that's how it should be.

Only time will tell. As flawed as it is, I have faith in the judicial system

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

No, 12Footer, I am not a lawyer.

However, I agree with you that an attorney can excuse a potential juror for any reason or for no reason and they do it all the time.

Any potential juror who admits to a prejudice should be and will be excused.

Say, OldMercs. On what basis do you claim that Ms. Plame was not a protected agent? I have only heard that the "leak" was illegal.

It is my opinion that "Scooter" will be aquitted. Absent mindedness may be annoying, but it is not illegal.

Only time will tell, JB, whether he will be aquitted.
At this point, we don't know the facts of the case.

If in fact, this was simply one issue out of hundreds Scooter and the VP's office was dealing with at the time, "Absent-mindedness" may well be a credible defense.

If it is shown that discrediting Wilson was Job 1 at the VP's office, and they were concentrating of that effort, "Absent-mindedness" may be a tough sell to a jury.

It's a tough thing to prove "Beyond a reasonable doubt" what was in someone's head as you have to do in cases of perjury, but that's how it should be.

Only time will tell. As flawed as it is, I have faith in the judicial system

Hey PW2, This goes back to the "common sense" part of my argument earlier in this thread responding to JB. You are correct: nobody but the actual litigants know all the facts, (and their knowledge may be incomplete as well). If the "discrediting Wilson" part is a serious consideration in this legal proceeding: Mr. Armatage would have had to be indicted. Mr. Wilson was an obvious liar, as the Senate investigation clearly showed. It must have been irritating, (from the administration's view) to see the partisn mainstream press give Wilson so much attention, (I am not just talking about Mr. Corn in Jimonicas' post). The real question, (and legal matter) is did Mr Libby intentionally mislead the Grand Jury? There are many WbWs, and Bro Hauts out there that have their minds made up, and we don't need another OJ outcome. My $.02. Respectfully JR

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

"...we don't need another OJ outcome."

So you agree, JR. Libby should be found guilty if he's guilty despite his public figure status. Glad we resolved that.

 

[crunch]

Re: Bush Administration inCredibility Eliminates Jurors

So you agree, JR. Libby should be found gulty if he's guilty despite his public figure status.

I think we can all get behind that, but you seem to be the one that doesn't want him to have a fair trial, just a quick conviction.