Ring ring ring ring ring ring ring jury phone.
Robeitussin.
Apparently, the lawyers (both sides) are working on agreeing which parts of the transcripts are to be read to the jury. So the jury’s day is done, but the court is still doing its thing.
Wonder if we’ll get a Daily Rant today?
someone has been ranting on some obscure social media most of the afternoon.
per cnn:
The judge also confirms for the record that the laptop does not have Wi-Fi.
The judge has left the bench.
The former president is leaning back in his chair with his arm on the back, gesturing as he talks to Blanche and his other attorney Emil Bove. Blanche is laughing.
He the leaves with his son, Don Jr.
Bluntly: If I were on the jury, I would have difficulty participating without written jury instructions. Probably won’t ever be an issue down here, but I guess I will make an issue of it next time I serve jury duty.
I don’t know. For some reasons these questions feel ominous to me. I have no real reason for that, just a feeling.
per cnn:
It will take hours for the court to fulfill the jury’s request to hear some parts of testimony again, one lawyer who used to work in the Manhattan District Attorney’s office says.
That means the court reporter has to go through the transcript and identify all of the instances that respond to the jury’s note, according to Karen Friedman Agnifilo, a CNN legal analyst. That could be in multiple places, she said, both on direct or cross-examination.
“Then the parties are gonna have to agree that that’s the only place in the transcripts that it exists and then it’ll be read back to them,” Agnifilo said, referring to lawyers on both sides.
Agnifilo said the court reporter will be the one that reads back the transcripts and the judge’s instructions, which was also requested by the jury.
The jury is expected to be back in court at 9:30 a.m. Thursday. They can continue to deliberate even while the court works on getting the transcripts ready, Agnifilo said, adding that it is possible that could happen tomorrow.
The jury’s questions indicate to me that they’re taking the matter seriously. They’re not trying to blow this off, or delaying things in order to have an extra lunch on the state’s dime. If that was the case, they could just sit there and discuss the weather, the Yankees, their golf game, and so on.
What I am finding frustrating is the same thing that CNN commentators are finding frustrating: that they don’t have transcripts ready, that they cannot give hard copies of the judge’s instructions to the jury, that TV coverage is prohibited. Jake Tapper summed it up best, I think, when he said something like, “New York courts need to be dragged into the 20th century.” And yes, he was fully aware of what he said.
i’m finding it interesting that they want to hear about the beginning of the scheme.
in august of 2015, a meeting took place where ami said they would be the eyes and ears of the campaign. that ami would have good stories for trump, hide bad stories, and write bad stories about his competitors.
as things went on trump’s famous frugality and non payment kicks in and here we are in a courtroom.
I’m cautiously optimistic.
The defense’s best chances come if the jury decided to not believe Cohen, and you don’t really need to review a lot of evidence to reach that point. So if they’re reviewing evidence, it feels to me like they’re trying to figure out if the facts fit the definition of the crimes as in the jury instructions. “Did he mean X or X-prime?” is harder to determine than “He probably never said anything like X”.
At the very least that part about the jury instructions not being given in print unless both counsels agree has got to go.
I hope that’s not a factorial.
I think it would be funny if, after they get Pecker’s testimony repeated, they then ask to re-hear witness #2.
And so on.
no. i have dealt with 5" binders and they are crazy to deal with.
they rip, sometimes the rings get out of shape and then stuff falls out. but 6" that is seriously unwieldy.
What’s the reasoning behind that? I understand the defense objected (and usually does), but why do they even have the option? I can think of reasons WHY the defense might not want them to have it, but that doesn’t answer the question.
And, I presume, if they can’t have a hard copy, they can’t have an audio recording of it either.
Same with the transcript. Why can’t they have that? Load it up on the laptop and make sure they know how to search/find things in it.
It seems odd that entire parts of the law exist because people have bad memories, but we make the jury remember every little bit of minutia they’ve had to absorb over, what, 150ish hours of testimony?
So if the jury is done for the night, Trump and everyone gets to leave. Right?
I guess Trump would go to Trump tower. I’m sure he and Melania will have a nice chat. If he can find her.
But if the jury is deliberating, everyone has to stay?
Me too. Remember what I posted upthread, asking if what Trump did meets the definition of tampering with the election? The jury might have the same question. I’d want very clear instructions on the law involved, and I’d want to re-hear the prosecution’s argument as to how the actions met the bar.
I was trying to be funny, because 6!" = 720". 
Yes.
Yes.
Not yet. The lawyers are discussing what parts of the transcripts the jury can get, and that can answer the jury’s questions.
According to CNN, everybody (except the jury) is still in court. Not sure how long before the court breaks for the day.
This is true, too. I should have said they can all leave unless the judge has ordered them to stick around and work on other matters to use time efficiently. Thanks for the correction.