I wonder about programmers on a jury. I’ve served on two. Programmers deal in facts and basic logic. Much like engineers.
I suppose that’s possible somewhere, but it never, ever happened where I worked.
A time waiver had to be affirmatively articulated by the defendant on the record in open court. One of my jobs was to quietly remind the judge I was working for of any procedural omission made during a hearing. “Time waived?” was a question I asked often.
Other places? I have no idea.
Well, I can definitively state that my dad claimed it happened to him. But then again, my dad wasn’t the most reliable source when it comes to matters like that, so who knows.
I’ve served on a lot of juries compared to most people, and I was a programmer. It never seemed to be an issue until my last jury service which was a civil case. The defense attorney was getting rid of anybody who had an analytical type of job, while the ADA was trying to keep them. I was excused by the defense.
There are always exceptions. But generally, I don’t like engineers on juries. The reason is they struggle (unconsciously) with the preponderance of the evidence standard. They would never build a bridge that “more likely than not” wouldn’t fail. They have much higher standards for their own work, and I think hold plaintiffs to a higher standard that the law requires.
Speedy trial is an important right, at least in theory. (It’s right in the Constitution, and the court rules) In my experience a judge is going to have a colloquy with the defendant to make sure the waiving of the right is knowingly and voluntary. The right to a speedy trial is routinely waived (and sometimes over the defendant’s objection), but it’s not done without the defendant being aware.
@Procrustus is (of course) spot on. I’ve proofread transcripts of a lot of pretrial hearings in federal district court criminal cases, and it’s routine for the judge to get agreement from the defense attorney that X amount of days to the next hearing/the trial will be waived for the speedy trial calculation.
There’s something called an “ends of Justice” continuance in federal court which serves to exclude time from the speedy trial calculation.
It’s usually brought by the defense simply because they need more time to prepare. Federal cases aren’t brought until the feds are ready to make their case, so by the time the defense lawyer gets it they are also usually getting thousands of pages of documents, or dozens of hours of videos. That stuff takes time go through!
Besides, cases only usually get better for the defense over time, not worse. If witnesses become hard to find, or memories and passions fade, that’s going to work in the defense’s advantage.
So it’s usually not controversial when a case gets delayed.
Here’s a stock image along those lines:
Not according to the jury nullification people.
John Jay, first Chief Justice, U.S. Supreme Court, wrote in Georgia v. Brailsford, 3 U.S. 1 (1794): “The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy.”
Samuel Chase, Supreme Court Justice and signer of the Declaration of Independence, wrote in 1804: “The jury has the right to determine both the law and the facts.”
Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said in 1902: “The jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact.”
Harlan F. Stone, the 12th Chief Justice of the U. S. Supreme Court, stated in 1941: “The law itself is on trial quite as much as the cause which is to be decided.”
In 1972, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said that the jury has an “unreviewable and irreversible power… to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge….” (US vs Dougherty, 473 F 2d 1113, 1139 (1972))
That’s beautiful. And way too late for a change. But thanks for the research.
When do we know what the charges will be?
I believe I heard after this court appearance, so in an hour or three?
I’ve read that his arraignment is scheduled for 2:15.
Thanks. I didn’t know if they had been leaked or something. I guess everything I’m reading about the “felony” charges so far is people guessing.
If the felony all hinges on that “in furtherance of a crime” law bumping up the misdemeanors then this will be a tough legal battle for the DA…at least a very long one. You’d think (or hope) there would be a real/true felony in play like money laundering or something.
I’m trying to remember where I heard it, and I think it was Chris Hayes last night. They said that the indictment is sealed, but once it goes to court it’s public record. But they also said that (obviously) they aren’t going to read the entire 300 page indictment out loud in court, so it’ll be some additional time until the DA or whoever releases the information.
Also I thought it was 11:30 a.m., not 2:15 p.m., so add a few hours to my estimate. And of course I could be entirely wrong.
The time of 2:15 was just a throwaway line on CNN, so who knows who they were gossiping with at the courthouse.
The court schedule is usually not a mystery. I wonder if they’re being vague due to security concerns.
(plus, Trump is not a morning person)
MSNBC has been saying 2:15 p.m. Eastern for two days.
Oh, thanks.
CNN has also.
I’ve got CNN on here. They’re doing quite the production; Anderson Cooper is hosting a panel of talking heads. In between, they’re reporting that Trump will leave Trump Tower anytime. Given that it is currently 1:07 EDT in New York, it’s plausible.
I’ve got cold beer in the fridge, and the popcorn is ready to go.