General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAn indictment and a jury trial but no conviction?
How would you feel if Donald Trump was tried by a jury but they refused to convict?
However, all the facts would come out and he would be totally exposed for the fraud and traitor that he is?
Would it serve any useful purpose to go thru a jury trial and not have a conviction?
Even if 90% of the people believed him guilty, but the jury found him "not guilty", would it be better than no trial at all?
2naSalit
(86,056 posts)The George Floyd protests were a big thing, that will be peanuts compared to the people saying "Fuck NO!"
nightwing1240
(1,996 posts)Much more would be exposed than we most likely know at this point.
Tetrachloride
(7,728 posts)regnaD kciN
(26,035 posts)theres zero chance you get a jury that will vote unanimously to acquit and, if the trial is held in D.C., at least a reasonable chance of getting a MAGAt-free jury that could convict.
Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)SoCalDavidS
(9,998 posts)But at least he was tried.
What would the reaction have been if they had never arrested OJ or charged him with Double Murder to begin with?
Irish_Dem
(45,637 posts)And we know Trump will try to bribe and threaten jury members.
That is his history.
Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)When selecting a jury, the federal or state district pulls names from a variety of sources, including registered voters, unemployment beneficiaries, and people with drivers licenses or state identification cards.
This is known as a jury pool and varies in size on a case-by-case basis. The potential jurors are selected at random by a computer program. If you are selected for jury duty, you will receive a notice in the mail that informs you of the date and time that you must attend court proceedings. There are various exemptions that can be made in order to get out of jury duty (usually based on health reasons), but in general, if you are selected for jury duty, you are required by law to attend.
After a jury pool is selected, the process of voir dire begins. This is when the attorneys and court begin to narrow down the pool to the jurors that will decide the case. Most states require anywhere from 6 to 12 people to be part of a jury, and up to 6 alternates are selected to take the place of the main jurors if needed. The potential jurors are moved in small groups to sit in the jury box, which is the box in the courtroom in which the jury sits during trial.
The voir dire process tends to vary from state to state, but it generally involves potential jurors being interviewed about their personal backgrounds. The judge and attorneys will ask about their beliefs and employment history to ensure that there isnt a conflict of interest with the case.
https://aizmanlaw.com/jury-selection-criminal-cases/
The voir dire process includes more scrutiny steps (read in full).
Glenn Kirschner said the DOJ is very good at detecting biased potential jurors.
Irish_Dem
(45,637 posts)And even if they can, not a legit reason to dismiss a potential jury member?
We know that Trump uses carrot and stick to manipulate people to do his bidding.
He has been able to get very seasoned and experience attorneys to commit crimes for him.
I think it is naive to assume any process where Trump is involved will go smoothly.
Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)It's up to the Judge to declare it 'closed' (to protect witnesses and jurors, for example).
When Can the Courtroom Be Closed in Criminal Proceedings?
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=17501989
The trial even can be held 'in absentia' (only attorneys, judge and jurors).
Genki Hikari
(1,766 posts)If you're being considered for a high-profile case, you will be required to fill out a juror questionnaire asking for your name, age, education level and where you work (if you do). You also certify on that form that you are QUALIFIED to be on the jury. It's the usual stuff about being 18+ and a resident of the jurisdiction where the trial is held, but it will also include requirements that you be of good moral character and that you have no misdemeanor or felony indictments or convictions on your record.
With that questionnaire in hand, most attorneys will run a background check on you to verify that you told the truth about those things. If they find anything hinky they don't like that indicates you would be vulnerable to blackmail or bribery, they will have you off that jury in a heartbeat.
As for "seasoned and experienced" attorneys, the bouffant bozo hasn't had a decent one of those in over a decade now. Attorneys he could call upon who were once good at the job have lost their minds--the Kraken cow, Ghouliani, etc. They have let their MAGA stupidity rot even their legal know-how.
elleng
(130,152 posts)Insanity defense might get him off, but if that's likely, it's also likely he'll PLEA insanity!!!
Ocelot II
(115,280 posts)And anyhow, he's not the sort of crazy that would support an insanity defense - he knows exactly what he's doing and he doesn't care that it's wrong or illegal.
Mr.Bill
(24,104 posts)babbling incoherently. That will be the final card they have to play.
brooklynite
(93,870 posts)At most you'd have a hung jury.
elleng
(130,152 posts)DoJ messed up a 'small' 9/11 case for which I was a juror, essentially a swindler seeking funds, but badly prepared and argued, so we the jury said 'not guilty.' Won't happen with trmp as defendant.
Response to kentuck (Original post)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Walleye
(30,723 posts)By the time it comes to trial I dont think hell have a lot of fans left. They will have moved onto the tinpot dictator DeSantis. One thing about MAGATs when they turn on somebody it gets severe
Mr.Bill
(24,104 posts)the DOJ strategy all along. Wait until no one cares enough anymore to defend him in a jury room.
Walleye
(30,723 posts)republianmushroom
(13,058 posts)23 months and counting
lees1975
(3,724 posts)Either the law applies to him, or it doesn't and if he doesn't go to trial, there's no law that applies to him. Open the prisons, turn everyone loose and fire all law enforcement because we won't need them. Everyone can just do their own thing and see how long they can survive.
The DOJ is on borrowed time now, and if they want to get a conviction that means anything, specifically, putting Trump in prison and keeping him from running for office, they must get this done. We're two years out from the event itself, and plenty of other convictions are happening. It's time for him to be indicted, held and convictied. No more excuses.
Response to lees1975 (Reply #14)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
triron
(21,915 posts)Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)Either in the documents case or in the insurrection case (or in both cases).
That would set a trial date around June, and appeals to follow up to the USSC if need be.
onenote
(42,379 posts)Manafort was indicted on October 30, 2017. His trial started July 31, 2018 -- nine months later.
Stone was indicted on January 24, 2019. His trial started November 5, 2019 -- 9.5 months later.
It will take a least that long, if not longer before any trial of Trump begins after any indictment is handed down.
Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)And the sheer amount of evidence collected.
And the Judge could make the procedures 'closed' to the public (to protect witnesses and jurors).
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=17501989
And the case could even be heard 'in absentia' (only prosecutors, defense attorneys, jurors, the press) if need be.
lees1975
(3,724 posts)What's left to take any time? Get moving and get it done and stop making excuses. They can do this whenever they please. No more stalling.
BaronChocula
(1,458 posts)regardless of what the outcome might be.
Response to BaronChocula (Reply #21)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
MMBeilis
(188 posts)ProfessorGAC
(64,425 posts)Thanks for joining the conversation.
MMBeilis
(188 posts)gopiscrap
(23,674 posts)Takket
(21,424 posts)Im still sitting here waiting for an indictment...
Response to Takket (Reply #24)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
msfiddlestix
(7,265 posts)Honestly, the singular reason I browse DU every morning is to seek announcements he's been indicted/charged/tried/convicted and sentenced to life in behind bars in maximum security.
It hasn't been a rewarding experience so far, but the chorus of "keep hope alive" rings in my head.
Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)ITAL
(619 posts)You can't appeal a Not Guilty verdict in a criminal trial.
Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)While all the remaining ones get a Not Guilty verdict?
Or bring the charges one at a time?
Genki Hikari
(1,766 posts)The only party who can appeal is the defendant who has received a guilty verdict.
Emile
(21,905 posts)Trump attempted to overthrow our democracy and must face justice!
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)old as dirt
(1,972 posts)Not Guilty is not possible. A Hung Jury is, I suppose. Let him spend the rest of his life in court, if not in jail.
Vinca
(50,170 posts)(Elmer Stuart Rhoades and company) was a big wake up call to everyone - including Trump - who thinks it's just fine to plot a coup. My concern, which I really, really hope is unfounded, is that Biden would pardon him in an effort to "heal the country."
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Not going to happen.
Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)It would 'unite' the country against him and that would be dumber than dumb.
The country as it is, with the extreme-right cable media propagandists for profits, the maga Qult and the stoopid criminal repub politicians will not 'unite' but elect desantanus...
Genki Hikari
(1,766 posts)If the trial is for the stolen documents, tax evasion, tax fraud, or the Georgia election tampering, then I don't see a jury giving an outright innocent verdict. A hung jury is the best he could hope for with any of those.
I'd like to think 12 Americans are smart enough to grasp his guilt in plotting J6, but the cynic in me fears that most Americans are so irredeemably stupid that they'd accept whatever excuse he or his shysters make up to let him walk on that. Hope for a trial held in DC for this one. That jury pool is our best bet for holding the scumbag accountable.
SKKY
(11,772 posts)...and you gotta know MAGA nation would be falling all over themselves to "plant" jurors. But, it's all still worth the risk because there is no scenario where a prosecutor would NOT put him on the stand. And an even less likely probability of him not perjuring himself at least 15 times a day. At that point, his con is exposed, and a judge decides what happens after that. I'd take my chances.
jgo
(870 posts)Instead of putting all of the eggs in one basket, break up the indictments into multiple trials. One for submitting false documents. Another one for contempt. Another for perjury, etc. Unfortunately, for some reason that I don't think I'll ever understand, that is not the way the legal system works.
Just A Box Of Rain
(5,104 posts)I also think that failing to convict him on the charges would be highly problematic.
Therefore, it is imperative that the cases be prepared with the ultimate care. With rock-solid evidence.
The DOJ and Jack Smith seem to understand the reality on the Federal level, and it seems like the prosecution team is in good hands.
Response to kentuck (Original post)
Prairie_Seagull This message was self-deleted by its author.