Patterico's Pontifications

10/19/2007

A Verdict in the Holy Land Foundation Trial

Filed under: Law,Terrorism — DRJ @ 9:28 am



[Guest post by DRJ]

The jury in the Holy Land Foundation terror trial in Dallas has been deliberating for 19 days and has reached a verdict that will be read Monday.

Background posts on the Holy Land Foundation trial are here and here.

— DRJ

6 Responses to “A Verdict in the Holy Land Foundation Trial”

  1. That’s just bizarre to me. If I were the judge, I would be absolutely paranoid that something would happen over the weekend to screw things up. What if a juror gets careless (hey, we’re done, right? surely I can talk about the case with my gossipy spouse…), and word gets out BEFORE the verdict is unsealed? Worse yet, what if one of the jurors is hit by a bus going to church on Sunday? Deliberations would have to begin all over again (at least if the verdict is guilty, as the defendant would be deprived of the right to poll the jury to be certain, in open court, that the verdict was unanimous).

    Nightmare of nightmares, I can also imagine a juror changing his/her mind over the long 3 day weekend. I don’t care if the judge and all the prosecutors have to hop on the red-eye and hold court on Saturday, they ought to get the verdict read ASAP. This is begging for trouble.

    PatHMV (0b955c)

  2. I wish they hadn’t told us. This trial is really big–I hope and pray we win.

    Patricia (4117a9)

  3. I hope nobody hangs a noose on the courthouse door.

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  4. After this extraordinarily long a period of deliberations, it’s mere prudence to ensure that the judge who tried the case will be there to receive the verdict, rather than permitting another district judge to receive the verdict.

    Beldar (369293)

  5. Beldar, I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt that the judge and the prosecutors really, really, really needed to attend whatever conference they were at rather than wait for the verdict. I know what a long case can do to one’s schedule and personal life, so I’m refraining from criticizing them for being gone when the verdict came out. (But imagine how much time would have been lost if the jurors had had a question about the charge or something, and it couldn’t be answered because everybody was gone.)

    You are correct that it’s more prudent to have the presiding judge (and the chief prosecutor) present to take the verdict. But prudence also dictates that you take the jury’s verdict as rapidly as possible after they reach it. A lot of things could happen over the weekend. Having chosen to go out of town while the jury was deliberating, they should have made plans to return immediately once the verdict came in, not wait for 3 days.

    PatHMV (0e077d)

  6. May God Give the jurers the COMMON SENSE to come to a RIGHTOUS verdict for all involved in this long, drawn out case.

    jojo (b525ac)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3065 secs.