• ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    It also lets the defense examine “would a killer target the United healthcare CEO specifically because they were personally evil vs a statement against the system?” That’s also helpful for a defense angling for a nullification mistrial.

      • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        It is, but you need the whole jury to vote that way which i find particularly unlikely. One person voting for nullification, which is more likely, is a mistrial.

      • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I am not a lawyer.

        Nullification is when the jury hands in a verdict of “not guilty”, even though there’s a preponderance of evidence that the law was indeed broken by the defendant. They basically ignore the Judge’s instructions to weigh the evidence and do something else instead. This would trigger an appeal by the prosecution on the basis of mistrial, since the optics on that situation look like something procedural is way off.

        I’m not well-versed in these matters, but I am intrigued by what would happen if this went to appeal. If it went all the way to SCOTUS, or even some appeals court with a crooked judge, that might not go so well for the defendant.

        • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          You don’t get to appeal a not guilty verdict right or wrong its done forever. A mistrial only happens before a verdict is reached so either side could be looking for justification for one if they believe that they stand to lose the case but the judge has to find there is cause.