Feasebal is my new favourite word.
Thank you fine sir.
feasebal
Well, that’s a new one
They managed to find enough people who didn’t already realise that trump is a lying, cheating pile of shit whip doesn’t have an honest bone in his body for his trial.
yes the healthcare system is evil. but i also don’t think all people who’ve been screwed over would support the death of the CEOs of it. Even then, the jury’s being asked if luigi is guilty of killing the guy, and assuming the allegations are true, then they’d say yes.
I’m sure in your bubble there’s a lot of people that would let him go just to make a point but general public is very stupid and easily manipulated. They will easily find 12 people that will “fulfill their duty” and make sure “justice was served”. It’s very unlikely that 1 person believing in jury nullification will slip through and derail it by causing miss trail, let alone 12 that will unanimously vote “not guilty”.
Verdict ,not guilty
The whole jury would have to be made up of CEOs to achieve that. Any lawyer, even the worst one, could argue that they aren’t his peers making the selection invalid.
Here’s a question: how many people making more than $200,000/year or who are independently wealthy actually serve on a jury?
I ask this because every jury pool I’ve been in was made up of working class people. Those too poor don’t vote and so aren’t on their lists, and those too rich always seem to have acceptable reasons to be excused, if they’re ever pooled in the first place.
Yeah just get non-Americans.
You don’t have not-have an opinion on the US healthcare system, you just have to claim that your opinion on the healthcare system won’t affect your ability to reach an impartial verdict.
Yes, people who haven’t had insurance or people who have it but don’t use it because they don’t know they can.
Both of those are screwed over by the healthcare system and the companies perpetrating it. If you cant afford healthcare or don’t understand it because it is to convoluted, that is a result of the policies of healthcare providers.
I don’t think that would be a hard requirement. If somebody can explain how they will be fair despite a negative experience with an insurance company and the prosecution is okay with it, then they can serve.
Prosecution will strike them. Next.
It’s often not that simple or easy, especially if someone explains they can still be impartial. The judge and defense are involved too, the prosecution doesn’t always get what they want.
Peremptory challenge, no reason needed. It’s one of the six I get for the case. Next.
