Manafort juror says one holdout prevented conviction on all charges

[Crepitus]

Well, I guess that clears things up.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/23/manafort-juror-says-one-holdout-prevented-conviction-on-all-charges/

Juror Paula Duncan spoke to Fox News one day after the jury returned a guilty verdict against Manafort on eight financial crime counts and deadlocked on 10 others.

“It was one person who kept the verdict from being guilty on all 18 counts,” Duncan, 52, told the network.

All it takes is one tRumpkin to fuck shit up.

 

[Borillar]

Well, I guess that clears things up.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/23/manafort-juror-says-one-holdout-prevented-conviction-on-all-charges/

Juror Paula Duncan spoke to Fox News one day after the jury returned a guilty verdict against Manafort on eight financial crime counts and deadlocked on 10 others.

“It was one person who kept the verdict from being guilty on all 18 counts,” Duncan, 52, told the network.

So only one jurist had a conscience.

Trump probably paid her off.

 

[deanrd]

Well, I guess that clears things up.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/23/manafort-juror-says-one-holdout-prevented-conviction-on-all-charges/

Juror Paula Duncan spoke to Fox News one day after the jury returned a guilty verdict against Manafort on eight financial crime counts and deadlocked on 10 others.

“It was one person who kept the verdict from being guilty on all 18 counts,” Duncan, 52, told the network.

Yep - this was my prediction. There would be one hardened Trump loyalist who never should have been allowed on this jury.
I think Feds should retry the other 10 ... Should be 18 for 18.

Look at the state they were in. I'm surprised it was only one Trump nutjob on the jury.

But it doesn't matter.

First, the evidence in the other 8 counts were so overwhelming, even a Trump goon was too afraid not to say the obvious truth. And the other 10 were only deadlocked. They could be tried again. And with the odds at 11 to 1, it's likely to have 10 more convictions.

Then there are the all the foreign agent felony charges coming up in a couple of weeks in DC. That's the trial that has Trump freaked.

 

[Political Junky]

Well, I guess that clears things up.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/23/manafort-juror-says-one-holdout-prevented-conviction-on-all-charges/

Juror Paula Duncan spoke to Fox News one day after the jury returned a guilty verdict against Manafort on eight financial crime counts and deadlocked on 10 others.

“It was one person who kept the verdict from being guilty on all 18 counts,” Duncan, 52, told the network.

Yep - this was my prediction. There would be one hardened Trump loyalist who never should have been allowed on this jury.
I think Feds should retry the other 10 ... Should be 18 for 18.

Look at the state they were in. I'm surprised it was only one Trump nutjob on the jury.

But it doesn't matter.

First, the evidence in the other 8 counts were so overwhelming, even a Trump goon was too afraid not to say the obvious truth. And the other 10 were only deadlocked. They could be tried again. And with the odds at 11 to 1, it's likely to have 10 more convictions.

Then there are the all the foreign agent felony charges coming up in a couple of weeks in DC. That's the trial that has Trump freaked.[/QUOTis
Juror Paula Duncan, who spoke, is a Tump supporter.

 

[Maxdeath]

That’s how a jury works if you don’t believe a person is guilty you don’t vote that way if you believe they are guilty you do. If anyone here was on trial for something would you want a member of jury voting with the majority just so they could go along to get along?

I expect honesty and truthfulness, no matter who you are. Right or Left.

The problem we have today is, we are dealing with the most criminal administration in U.S. history. No presidency has ever come this close, with so much legal liability looming. That's the big difference. Beyond that, the answer to your question is a resounding yes.

You must have a really short memory. The last administration had everyone beat.
Bomb a hospital. Check.
Use IRS as own brown shirt squad. Check.
Give large taxpayer gift to campaign sponsor. Check.
Allow CIA to spy on congress. Check.
Allow NSA to spy on citizens. Check.

Do we need to continue through all 20?

Going off topic and searching old news about others, is totally irrelevant. Today is what counts. Stay focused.

No you are the one that brought up old news as you stated the most criminal administration. I was only pointing out that that was misinformation. It would not be considered off topic if you were to post that John Glenn was the first man in space and someone pointed out that Uri Gregarin was.

If you want to stay on topic do not state fallacious generalizations.

 

[deanrd]

That’s how a jury works if you don’t believe a person is guilty you don’t vote that way if you believe they are guilty you do. If anyone here was on trial for something would you want a member of jury voting with the majority just so they could go along to get along?

I expect honesty and truthfulness, no matter who you are. Right or Left.

The problem we have today is, we are dealing with the most criminal administration in U.S. history. No presidency has ever come this close, with so much legal liability looming. That's the big difference. Beyond that, the answer to your question is a resounding yes.

You must have a really short memory. The last administration had everyone beat.
Bomb a hospital. Check.
Use IRS as own brown shirt squad. Check.
Give large taxpayer gift to campaign sponsor. Check.
Allow CIA to spy on congress. Check.
Allow NSA to spy on citizens. Check.

Do we need to continue through all 20?

Going off topic and searching old news about others, is totally irrelevant. Today is what counts. Stay focused.

No you are the one that brought up old news as you stated the most criminal administration. I was only pointing out that that was misinformation. It would not be considered off topic if you were to post that John Glenn was the first man in space and someone pointed out that Uri Gregarin was.

If you want to stay on topic do not state fallacious generalizations.

John Glenn and John McCain were two of the famous Keating 5.
Being a famous hero has it's perks.

 

[DrLove]

Read the verdict sheet .. Interesting - Rarely would a foreman actually write the vote count .. clearly they were frustrated by the lone clown who voted not guilty on ten counts. Word is that he or (she I believe) could not articulate WHY they felt the way they did.

Read the verdict sheet from the Manafort jury - CNNPolitics

 

[deanrd]

Well, I guess that clears things up.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/23/manafort-juror-says-one-holdout-prevented-conviction-on-all-charges/

Juror Paula Duncan spoke to Fox News one day after the jury returned a guilty verdict against Manafort on eight financial crime counts and deadlocked on 10 others.

“It was one person who kept the verdict from being guilty on all 18 counts,” Duncan, 52, told the network.

It may not matter.

Preponderance of the Evidence is actually a subjective term

Because Manafort was found guilty, he could be sentenced on all 18 charges even though found guilty on only 8. The law gives the judge a lot a latitude. The prosecutor probably won't do anything if the sentence is severe enough.

We'll find out next Tuesday, the sentencing date.

 

[deanrd]

Read the verdict sheet .. Interesting - Rarely would a foreman actually write the vote count .. clearly they were frustrated by the lone clown who voted not guilty on ten counts. Word is that he or (she I believe) could not articulate WHY they felt the way they did.

Read the verdict sheet from the Manafort jury - CNNPolitics

I was watching Fox and the word is they were trying to protect Trump from the witch hunt but the evidence for those 8 was so overwhelming, they couldn't say no.

It was against the rules to put 11 to 1 "G" next to the 10 charges, but not against the law. The foreman was clearly sending a message to the judge.

 

[DrLove]

Read the verdict sheet .. Interesting - Rarely would a foreman actually write the vote count .. clearly they were frustrated by the lone clown who voted not guilty on ten counts. Word is that he or (she I believe) could not articulate WHY they felt the way they did.

Read the verdict sheet from the Manafort jury - CNNPolitics

I was watching Fox and the word is they were trying to protect Trump from the witch hunt but the evidence for those 8 was so overwhelming, they couldn't say no.

It was against the rules to put 11 to 1 "G" next to the 10 charges, but not against the law. The foreman was clearly sending a message to the judge.

Yep - I saw the lady who believed it was a "witch hunt" but voted guilty on 18 counts because .. well, Crooked Paul IS guilty and the evidence was overwhelming.

Now, this judge in his sentencing decision MAY take into account the preponderance of evidence as well as the lone holdout on those ten counts. And Mueller may haul him back for another run on those ten after the trial next month.

I'm counting the days until Trump pardons Crooked Paul and fires Sessions. The crap WILL hit the fan.

 

[deanrd]

Read the verdict sheet .. Interesting - Rarely would a foreman actually write the vote count .. clearly they were frustrated by the lone clown who voted not guilty on ten counts. Word is that he or (she I believe) could not articulate WHY they felt the way they did.

Read the verdict sheet from the Manafort jury - CNNPolitics

I was watching Fox and the word is they were trying to protect Trump from the witch hunt but the evidence for those 8 was so overwhelming, they couldn't say no.

It was against the rules to put 11 to 1 "G" next to the 10 charges, but not against the law. The foreman was clearly sending a message to the judge.

Yep - I saw the lady who believed it was a "witch hunt" but voted guilty on 18 counts because .. well, Crooked Paul IS guilty and the evidence was overwhelming.

Now, this judge in his sentencing decision MAY take into account the preponderance of evidence as well as the lone holdout on those ten counts. And Mueller may haul him back for another run on those ten after the trial next month.

I'm counting the days until Trump pardons Crooked Paul and fires Sessions. The crap WILL hit the fan.

The prosecutor doesn't have to decide to retry until after Manafort's second trial. If you get sentenced to a hundred years without parole, who cares? You're dying in jail.

 

[DrLove]

Read the verdict sheet .. Interesting - Rarely would a foreman actually write the vote count .. clearly they were frustrated by the lone clown who voted not guilty on ten counts. Word is that he or (she I believe) could not articulate WHY they felt the way they did.

Read the verdict sheet from the Manafort jury - CNNPolitics

I was watching Fox and the word is they were trying to protect Trump from the witch hunt but the evidence for those 8 was so overwhelming, they couldn't say no.

It was against the rules to put 11 to 1 "G" next to the 10 charges, but not against the law. The foreman was clearly sending a message to the judge.

Yep - I saw the lady who believed it was a "witch hunt" but voted guilty on 18 counts because .. well, Crooked Paul IS guilty and the evidence was overwhelming.

Now, this judge in his sentencing decision MAY take into account the preponderance of evidence as well as the lone holdout on those ten counts. And Mueller may haul him back for another run on those ten after the trial next month.

I'm counting the days until Trump pardons Crooked Paul and fires Sessions. The crap WILL hit the fan.

The prosecutor doesn't have to decide to retry until after Manafort's second trial. If you get sentenced to a hundred years without parole, who cares? You're dying in jail.

Excellent point my friend. It really won't matter. Assuming Trump doesn't pardon Crooked Paul prior to next trial, word is that the evidence is even more damning. The charges address his ties to Russia INCLUDING the last minute removal of GOP plank to help Ukraine defend themselves against Putin aggression making it - shall we say; more "Russia friendly". Good times!

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Well, I guess that clears things up.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/23/manafort-juror-says-one-holdout-prevented-conviction-on-all-charges/

Juror Paula Duncan spoke to Fox News one day after the jury returned a guilty verdict against Manafort on eight financial crime counts and deadlocked on 10 others.

“It was one person who kept the verdict from being guilty on all 18 counts,” Duncan, 52, told the network.

Yep - this was my prediction. There would be one hardened Trump loyalist who never should have been allowed on this jury.
I think Feds should retry the other 10 ... Should be 18 for 18.

"There would be one hardened Trump loyalist who never should have been allowed on this jury."

So you think that a jury should be chosen as to what their Political Affiliation is? That NO Conservatives should be allowed on a jury?

 

[DrLove]

Well, I guess that clears things up.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/23/manafort-juror-says-one-holdout-prevented-conviction-on-all-charges/

Juror Paula Duncan spoke to Fox News one day after the jury returned a guilty verdict against Manafort on eight financial crime counts and deadlocked on 10 others.

“It was one person who kept the verdict from being guilty on all 18 counts,” Duncan, 52, told the network.

Yep - this was my prediction. There would be one hardened Trump loyalist who never should have been allowed on this jury.
I think Feds should retry the other 10 ... Should be 18 for 18.

"There would be one hardened Trump loyalist who never should have been allowed on this jury."

So you think that a jury should be chosen as to what their Political Affiliation is? That NO Conservatives should be allowed on a jury?

Not my point. There were other Trump loyalists on the jury including an interviewed juror who said that she believed the Mueller investigation was a "witch hunt" but voted guilty on all 18 charges because of the preponderance of the evidence.

I've done jury duty 3 times and know - THAT was an excellent juror. The lone holdout on ten counts was not. Apparently that juror was completely unable to verbalize WHY they believed he was not guilty on ten counts. If you can't rationalize a position, you don't belong on ANY jury.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"No you are the one that brought up old news" is a lie by Maxdeath.

He is the one who brought up the last administration.

Come on, Max, stay in the real now.

 

[Maxdeath]

"No you are the one that brought up old news" is a lie by Maxdeath.

He is the one who brought up the last administration.

Come on, Max, stay in the real now.

Jake put down the crack pipe. I never said that he brought up old news. Reading is fundamental. Read the post again or better yet have someone that can sound out the two syllable words read it two you.

I brought up what he stated was not fact.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I quoted you, Max.

You lied.

Step along.

 

[Maxdeath]

I quoted you, Max.

You lied.

Step along.

Jake if you are talking my second post then you are right and I apologize.

My origanal post and the one that seemed to get everyone upset was about pointing out the past administration was far more corrupt then the present one.