their private text messages became part of this trial, but in the end, the jury decided that what those contain and they were spotting whether andy was in the vicinity or not, getting ready to proceed with whatever they were going to do to him and somehow the jury discounted this? it is remarkable the amount of evidence jury must have discounted to reach the verdict here that the defendants were not liable and leads to the conclusions that jury intimidation was a factor here. it is unclear to what extent jurors were intimidated, how it happened, what the court did, but the jury was concerned they were being threatened or potentially docked or there would be repercussion if the
part of this trial, but in the end the jury decided that, you know, what those contained and they were spotting where andy was in the vicinity or not, obviously getting ready to, you know, proceed with whatever they were going to do to him. somehow the jury discounted this? it s truly remarkable the amount of evidence that the jury must have discounted to reach its not guilty verdict or its verdict here, the defendants here weren t liable. it real really leads to jury intimidation was a factor here. it s a little unclear to us to what extent these jurors were intimidated, how this happened. what form it took, but the court did inform both parties of the quay of deliberations the jury was concerned that they were being threatened or potentially doxxed or there was going to be some kind of repercussions if the verdict did not come out the right way here. we all know whether a that means
The Maryland Senate gave preliminary approval to bill permitting convicted felons to sit on juries unless their conviction was for witness or jury intimidation.
The Kyle Rittenhouse murder trial is another precedent-setting trial where justice needs a victory so Americans can continue to defend themselves legally against crazed Leftists and their gun [.]
candidate all the way from missouri coming over to show his support because i think people understand what s on the line. rachel: will, here is a statement from nbc. they said while the traffic violation took place near the jury van, the freelancer never contacted or intended to contact the jurors during deliberations. and never photographed or intended to photograph them. the question is then, why was that person following the van? lawrence: and blew a light, will. will: doesn t matter quite honesty it doesn t matter. of course it s common sense we can read in that he was following that van so he could ultimately identify the jurors. that is clear. that is common sense. even if it weren t, ainsley. even if that were not the case, simply following the bus served as jury intimidation. jury tampering. if you are on that jury and you turn around and see a car blowing a red light to lawrence s point and chasing you, you begin to process something you already know, which is there extreme ex