One lone holdout...

[babylonsister]

:freak:


Jurors were close to convicting Rod Blagojevich
AP

By DON BABWIN and DEANNA BELLANDI, Associated Press Writers


CHICAGO – They were close. After three weeks of respectful but increasingly tense deliberations, 11 jurors were ready to convict Rod Blagojevich of what prosecutors called a "political corruption crime spree" that would have sent yet another former Illinois governor to prison.

Not close enough. On vote after vote, the jury kept coming up one juror short — a lone holdout who wouldn't budge and would agree only that Blagojevich lied to the FBI. "The person just did not see the evidence that everyone else did," said juror Stephen Wlodek.

The guilty verdict on the least serious of the 24 counts against him, and mistrial on all the rest, led Blagojevich to taunt prosecutors in the courthouse lobby. More than a year after federal prosecutors accused him of crimes that would make Abraham Lincoln "roll over in his grave," the disgraced politician bragged about essentially fighting them to a draw.

more...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100818/ap_on_re_us/us_blagojevich_trial

[daylan b]

1. One Juror or "The Juror"?

.

[Lochloosa]

2. +1

[ThomWV]

3. That is what makes our legal system great; 1 is all it takes.

Better a guilty man walks free than an innocent one be imprisoned.

[babylonsister]

4. The cynic in me

screams 'check his bank account!'. Too many crime novels? :shrug:

[RaleighNCDUer]

7. They did, and they didn't find anything. The prosecution simply

wrote that little anomaly off as evidence of his incompetence, that he was 'unsuccessfully' shaking people down, then for reasons unknown giving them the jobs/contracts/whatever that they wanted anyway.

Sure makes sense to me.:shrug:

[babylonsister]

8. I meant 'check the juror's bank account'. nt

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. Oops. got it. nt

[daylan b]

10. I'd consider not putting shake down money in your bank account...

...to actually show a level competence rather than incompetence.

[davsand]

5. 1 is also all you need to pay off if you want to skate on the charges..

There is more than one way to view that lone juror. We ARE talking about Illinois, after all.



Laura

[DainBramaged]

6. One day they will find Blago slumped over his steering wheel and a coroner will rule it suicide

even though the bullet will have entered from an unusual angle in a suicide case. Just like former Enron Corp. vice chairman J. Clifford Baxter.


Wiseguys and wiseasses are two different types of criminals.

[hfojvt]

11. this guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW-p8znDoVg

Not having followed the trial, I cannot say if I would side with the 11 or with the one.

[babylonsister]

12. Fellow Juror Says Holdout Would Have Wanted Video In Murder Trial

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/fellow_juror_says_blago_holdout_would_have_wanted.php?ref=fpb

Fellow Juror Says Blago Holdout Would Have Wanted Video in Murder Trial
Ryan J. Reilly | August 18, 2010, 9:28AM


Forget 12 angry men; fellow jurors say it was one stubborn woman who forced a deadlock in the case against former Gov. Rob Blagojevich on the most serious charge against him: that he tried to sell the former Senate seat of President Barack Obama.

"She wanted concrete evidence," 21-year-old criminal justice student Erik Sarnello told reporters. "If it were a murder trial, she would have wanted to see the video of the shooting."

more...

[RaleighNCDUer]

13. How appalling! She wanted concrete evidence!

Why isn't conjecture, innuendo, and hearsay good enough for her?

[babylonsister]

14. Granted, she was entitled to her opinion. But don't you have to

wonder about the other 11 jurors? What did they see and hear that she didn't? Or are you insinuating they went with conjecture, innuendo, and hearsay? I imagine the trial was run more professionally than that.

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. This is not about opinions - it's about facts.

She was being disparaged for wanting "solid evidence". That says to me that she didn't see solid evidence. There was nothing in writing. There was nothing on tape or video. There was no money trail.

Where was the solid evidence?

While I may personally feel that Blago is something of a jerk, he can't be convicted on that. Nobody presented any evidence that he accepted money for political favors.

The style of the case is typical with political prosecutions - throw literally dozens of charges at him for 2 purposes - 1) no matter how weak, something among them might stick; and 2) with that many charges being filed the jurors are subconsciously predisposed to think he MUST be guilty of SOMETHING. The prosecution started under the Bush regime, and we know that the Bush DOJ was not adverse to spurious political prosecutions - and one that could indirectly taint the incoming president would be all the sweeter as it says "See? THIS is the politically corrupt system he came from!"

I don't know if Blago is clean or not - but I ask, no, DEMAND solid evidence before conviction.

[babylonsister]

17. So 11 jurors were misinformed. Got it. nt

[One_Life_To_Give]

20. Or she watches too much CSI. nt

[DainBramaged]

18. Isn't concrete evidence the reason for a trial?

:shrug:


Oh wait, as we have learned so many times in Texas, just the word of a person who knew someone who was a friend of a friend of a second cousin of the accused and claims they saw him do it is enough to convict anyone of anything.


NO ONE ON THIS FORUM knows exactly what evidence was presented against Blago, and just maybe this lone juror wanted REAL proof not just hearsay or whatever they threw at the jury.

[spanone]

16. the media is spinning it as a huge loss for the prosecution...we'll see

11 to 1.....

[CaliforniaPeggy]

19. Greatest Page for you, my dear babylonsister...

A very interesting thread!

Thank you.