I was so happy to see this. 
If you conclude that the defendant is guilty because of what you believe you saw and what you believe you heard them say before the trial, and not on evidence presented in the trial, then yes, you are biased. You are not an honest juror because you should have told the court that you had already concluded that the defendant was guilty.
If you saw someone shoot another person dead on Fifth Avenue, would you be biased because you thought that person was guilty of homicide?
ETA: Obviously, if you witnessed the crime personally, you wouldn’t be on the jury, only on the witness stand.
Of course. You would perhaps be a good witness, but not a good juror, unless you honestly believed you could base your verdict based only on the evidence presented in court, and not on your preconceived beliefs.
ETA: Reply was before edit.
It makes you a witness, not eligible to serve as a juror.
Small potatoes compared to what they’re likely paying Jack Daniels, Jim Beam, Johnnie Walker, and Captain Morgan.
Back on track, I cannot see anything good coming from the motion to protect evidence from Trump himself.
If the motion is granted, Trump will say that he, as the defendant, is not being allowed access to the evidence against him. Only his lawyers are, and they’re being muzzled by not being allowed to share it with him. Very unfair!
If the motion is denied, Trump will claim a victory. It’s only a small one, but he will likely amplify it until it becomes a major victory over the corrupt DOJ to MAGAts. Who will cite it as evidence of Trump’s innocence.
I understand that Trump’s lawyers must file a response by 5:00 pm Monday. I guess we’ll see if they do so by the deadline.
I can. Witnesses and jurors will be protected from his relentless intimidation tactics.
Trump is going to Trump no matter what. All that’s left is to follow the course of justice as close to normal as possible, without fear or favor. In my view, this moment has been a long time coming, and there is just no avoiding it.
Thanks for saying it gets to you, too. I know I’m not the only one here on the Dope. But it still helps to hear it from others now and then.
I’m thinking of repetitive motion injuries from all the shrugging.
Besides what other said: it depends.
Maybe it was self-defense. Can you be sure that you saw everything from your angle? And what are the charges? Can the jury pick between 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree murder (depending on the state)?
Then there are the conspiracy theory sort of ideas, like a second shooter who fired the deadly shot, and got away. Unlikely, but if the defense claims that, it has to be pondered.
If I saw it, I’d be in such a state of shock I’m afraid my memory would be faulty.
As for Trump, I generally think he’s a crook. But without hearing the testimony and judge’s instructions, I don’t buy him being definitely guilty of what he’s accused of. IMHO prosecutors often overreach.
lol, I don’t need to hear the testimony or judge’s instructions as I… and many of us reading this… followed this crime from November 9th, 2020, onward.
Hell, PG, I literally took off work to see if the attack would succeed. To deny that an insurrection occurred is just that - denial.
I want him where he has to eat prison food.
Trump “steaks”? The kind with the marks where the jockey “tenderized” it?
Regarding where he should serve his prison term, if convicted and sentenced, I think that it would be a good use of funds to build a prison specifically for housing this particular prisoner. It could later serve as his presidential library. Of course, transcripts of all of his court cases would be an excellent exhibit in that library.
Trump likes burnt steaks with ketchup and Big Macs. He’d probably love him some institutional food. I think he should have to eat stuff like rare steaks with no ketchup or steak sauce, sushi and salad. He’d hate it.
“The good news, Donald, is that while in custody, you can have steak for dinner every night. The bad news is that it will be prepared by the lunch lady from Central High. And you can have as many vegetables as you like. Note that by ‘vegetables,’ we don’t mean ketchup.”
Back to the actual investigation and charges, as opposed to the hoped for resolution.
I really appreciate how Smith and the DOJ have built a tight, comparatively simple case around the events. Very little, at least according to my layman’s review, is particularly arcane or dependent upon who knew what/when/where. Much more of he did XYZ and such things violated ABC laws. And apparently we have MNO saying he did indeed -do- XYZ. And likely these call transcripts and texts asking GHI to help him do XYZ.
A nice clean build, laid out with minimum fuss for Trump to fight in the courts of law, as opposed to public opinion.
He is accused of being involved in a wide-ranging conspiracy. Do you believe that he just went along with what everyone around him was plotting and didn’t give a single thought to the legality of any of it?
Being a touch skeptical is fine. And sure, he and the public deserve to hear the details of what he is accused of and by whom (although NOT to threaten them with retaliation).
Buuuut, based on his actions to date with various “perfect” calls, and his own lawyer’s admission that he sought to pause the voting despite of the laws governing the elections, the charges seem very credible. And this is after he his own failures to challenge the certifications in the courts, during which he almost never managed anything more than innuendo, hearsay, and outright gossip!
Over and over and over again Trump has fundamentally said nothing he did was wrong, and rarely challenges the actual facts when it comes to the courts. He just seems to demand that he cannot, will not, be held liable even if the law says he should be.