Oops.
What the excused juror said should not complicate deliberations at all. They are either sequestered, in which case they would not know about them, or instructed not to view or read reports or comments about the case. And in my experience, especially in a high-stakes case like this, jurors take such instructions very seriously.
The judge has questioned the remaining jurors about whether they read the excused juror’s comments, so it is clear that they have not been sequestered. Also, 4 jurors and 3 alternates told the judge they had read or seen something about the case over the weekend.
I would agree with you that most jurors take seriously a judge’s instruction to avoid reading or viewing reports about the case on which they are sitting as jurors, but almost inevitably some (if not most) of them do in fact read or see/hear something about the case, even if it is only a headline or the intro to a story on TV/radio.
As much as I agree with many of Menendez’ positions on policy issues, it seems clear to me that his financial relationship with this doctor has been unethical, and also probably illegal. One of the clear frustrations that I have with politicians (of any party) is their willingness to get in bed with deep-pocketed donors for their own gain.
If we are to remain consistent, we should condemn Menendez, and/or vote him out when the next opportunity arises. Whether he is acquitted in court, or not, is irrelevant.
This settles the question (the only one I cared about here) as to whether lame duck and possibly the most unpopular governor in history Chris Christie will be able to name a Trump stooge to the Senate seat.
Not happening.
WHEN he skates, which is predetermined, it will be another instance of laws written and implemented by rich white guys directly aiding and abetting rich white guys.
One thing that’s very clear in these situations is that liberals/progs/Dems really do advocated for justice/punishment of Dems if that’s where the evidence leads. Conservatives/GOPs NEVER agree that one of their own ever commits a crime, much less should be held accountable. If Menendez did this, he needs to go; his unethical actions pollute the entire political world and should not be tolerated. As The Orange Fecal Stain opined during his crooked campaign, he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and he wouldn’t lose a voter. High praise indeed.
I agree with you. But unfortunately, consistency takes a second seat to raw political considerations right now. Menendez needs to stay there until Christie is gone. After that, whatever.
It’s a given that Christie will be gone before the Menendez seat becomes vacant, no matter the verdict. If Menendez is found guilty, not even the Senate Republicans would pursue expulsion while his appeals are still active. That’s the better part of a year right there. If McConnell did try to expel Menendez that soon, there is zero chance of him getting 2/3 majority to do it.
So, the issue here is getting Menendez to stand down for reelection next year, so another Dem, one without access to his buddy’s private plane, can run and win.
If Menendez is acquitted, it would reinforce the view that official bribery cases have become more difficult to prosecute, a trend traced to last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned the bribery conviction of former Republican Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell.
It has been my position all along that the McDonnell case has paved the way for Menendez to skate. Now, having stated that, we don’t know the dynamics within the jury room. I do, however, agree with others, that we really can’t afford to have Christie give the GOP another free seat in the Senate, even short-term. Given the excused juror’s comments (which probably should not even have been reported, in the interests of fairness), I’m expecting a hung jury or a verdict of “not guilty.” Menendez is not the most savory character, but the Senate is full of them right now.
I wondered about this. I was on jury duty earlier this year, and we had this exact situation – a woman sat for the entire case, but the deliberations went an extra day and she had an out-of-town job interview and asked to be excused. The judge excused her, but did so with the very clear instructions that even though she wasn’t on the jury any longer, she was not to discuss the case until it had been decided.
If Menendez is acquitted, it would reinforce the view that official bribery cases have become more difficult to prosecute, a trend traced to last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned the bribery conviction of former Republican Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell
Yep. The conservatives on the court have determined that corporations are persons and money is speech and that there’s no legal finding of bribery unless there is essentially a contract – a mutual agreement that the payments/gifts were for specific official acts.
Actually, it will be the result of a Supreme Court case interpreting a law written by rich white guys more narrowly than D.A.'s want to interpret it.
When I was a local elected official, we had to report all gifts, from any single source, if they totaled over $50, in any year. Campaign contributions were limited to $300. Even at those low thresholds, I was surprised at how strongly such demonstrations of respect, support and sympathy could influence my judgement and actions and those of colleagues. It doesn’t take much to sway someone’s opinions with presents and nice words. The more often you gift someone with kind words and praise, the more likely they are to help you when you need it. Its just human nature. Lotharios know this, so do people who want to move policy in their direction. Once the recipient gets used to the frequent small favors, its an easy rationalization to accept bigger gifts and to perform big favors in return. Now its friendship, not bribery. No quid pro quo is needed, the behavior comes naturally. Only the idiots in office need to break the law to get rich.
It appears to me that many readers are assuming guilt for various reasons (he’s white, rich, a senator, etc.) but I keep going back to the fact that Menendez never gave or demanded from other officials, a single specific action that benefited Melgen. And they have b been close friends since their youth. So what this and other articles call “the defense” may very well be the truth. Can any of you identify anything that either or both of these men did that caused any harm to you, the country, or anyone else?
The law is written so that to be guilty the elected official must use his office to create some legislation that aids the donor. That was not done in this case. Just providing introductions while helpful does not meet the requirements of the law after the McDonald decision in Va. What was fair for Republicans is fair for Dems. Frankly, given the facts of the case I am surprised charges were even brought.
Which is why the appeals process is so important here. The dismissed juror is indicating that there will not be a guilty verdict, but this case has gone to the jury, and there could hypothetically, if not likely, be a conviction. Or there could be in a re-trial if this jury is hung. Then perhaps the appeals court, or even the trial judge, could vacate a conviction based on the precedent of the McDonnell decision. In other words, what you think should happen (no prosecution, for lack of evidence) and what is happening (trial, jury deliberations) are two different things. Not saying you’re wrong about what should happen, but it’s kind irrelevant at this point.