General Law and Lawsuits

User avatar
tek
Posts: 1545
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:15 am

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#351

Post by tek »

“Na’Syia is someone we love and care about and have for years. Na’Syia had never made a single complaint to anyone until she had decided to quit and ask for an exorbitant amount of money in return. I am disappointed by this lawsuit and the allegations which are simply not true,” she said.
She's almost Trumpian here. Needs to work on that first sentence though.


User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 9312
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation:: bit twiddler

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#352

Post by raison de arizona »

Well, seeing as Alina Habba has been a model of good behavior up until now, I find this hard to believe.
:sarcasm:


"Take these seeds and put them in your pocket, so at least sunflowers will grow when you all die here."
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 5884
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#353

Post by RTH10260 »

Sixth Teenager Charged in Central Park Jogger Case to Be Exonerated
Steven Lopez is expected to have a robbery charge linked to the 1989 attack cleared from his record.

By Jonah E. Bromwich
July 25, 2022 Updated 9:42 a.m. ET

A forgotten co-defendant of the Central Park Five, who, like them, was charged with the rape of a jogger in a case that shook New York City and the nation, is expected to have a related conviction overturned Monday.

The case against the Five — teenagers of color who were innocent of the 1989 sexual assault on a white woman but who were convicted on the basis of false confessions that the police elicited — continues to shape attitudes surrounding racism in the criminal justice system, the media and society writ large. But the story of the sixth man — Steven Lopez — had previously been all but ignored.

Mr. Lopez, who was arrested when he was 15, struck a deal with prosecutors just before his trial two years later to avoid the more serious rape charge, instead pleading guilty to robbery of a male jogger.

Like his peers, he went to prison; collectively, the group served close to 45 years. Soon after the true assailant in the Central Park rape was identified in 2002, the authorities overturned the rape convictions against the five men. They have gone on to win a $41 million settlement from New York City and become the subjects of films, books and television shows.

But Mr. Lopez, now 48, has not received any settlement money or media attention, and his story is far less well-known.
His robbery conviction is expected to be tossed out in a Manhattan courthouse on Monday. The exoneration will be the first under the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, who vowed during his two years on the campaign trail to bolster the work of the office’s wrongful conviction unit.




https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/25/nyre ... -case.html


User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 9312
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation:: bit twiddler

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#354

Post by raison de arizona »

RTH10260 wrote: Mon Jul 25, 2022 10:04 am
Sixth Teenager Charged in Central Park Jogger Case to Be Exonerated
Steven Lopez is expected to have a robbery charge linked to the 1989 attack cleared from his record.

By Jonah E. Bromwich
July 25, 2022 Updated 9:42 a.m. ET

A forgotten co-defendant of the Central Park Five, who, like them, was charged with the rape of a jogger in a case that shook New York City and the nation, is expected to have a related conviction overturned Monday.

The case against the Five — teenagers of color who were innocent of the 1989 sexual assault on a white woman but who were convicted on the basis of false confessions that the police elicited — continues to shape attitudes surrounding racism in the criminal justice system, the media and society writ large. But the story of the sixth man — Steven Lopez — had previously been all but ignored.

Mr. Lopez, who was arrested when he was 15, struck a deal with prosecutors just before his trial two years later to avoid the more serious rape charge, instead pleading guilty to robbery of a male jogger.

Like his peers, he went to prison; collectively, the group served close to 45 years. Soon after the true assailant in the Central Park rape was identified in 2002, the authorities overturned the rape convictions against the five men. They have gone on to win a $41 million settlement from New York City and become the subjects of films, books and television shows.

But Mr. Lopez, now 48, has not received any settlement money or media attention, and his story is far less well-known.
His robbery conviction is expected to be tossed out in a Manhattan courthouse on Monday. The exoneration will be the first under the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, who vowed during his two years on the campaign trail to bolster the work of the office’s wrongful conviction unit.




https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/25/nyre ... -case.html
tfg refused to ever apologize for calling for the deaths, even long after they were proven innocent.
Image


"Take these seeds and put them in your pocket, so at least sunflowers will grow when you all die here."
Dave from down under
Posts: 1884
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#355

Post by Dave from down under »

Since it is related to "maritime law" I was tempted to put the below in the Sovcit thread.. ;)

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-26/ ... /101267898

'Narco-drones' are the newest form of drug trafficking. Our laws aren't yet ready to combat them

:snippity:

International law isn't entirely ready for narco-drones
There isn't one universal definition of a "ship" or "vessel". This makes it difficult to know when rights and duties attach to that ship.

China, for example, has a shark-shaped drone used to gather intelligence. While a naval surveillance ship may be entitled to the freedom of navigation, it shouldn't be presumed that such a small, uncrewed "vehicle" also enjoys this right.

Law enforcement officials are already using uncrewed sea vessels for policing purposes. Australia gifted drones to Sri Lanka last year to support efforts against migrant smuggling operations.

Private companies are designing uncrewed surface vehicles for use patrolling against illegal fishing.

The new technology will likely become a critical component for countries wanting better information about who's doing what and where.

:snippity:


User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 4908
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: TOP SECRET Fogbow HQ
Occupation:: muttering and puttering

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#356

Post by Foggy »

We had an extended discussion about drones on the Virtual Meetup night before last. :daydreaming:


We are NOT going back! - Nancy Pelosi
Mood: deciduous
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 4242
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:07 pm
Location: Rescue Pets Land
Occupation:: 21st Century Suffragist

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#357

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

https://popular.info/p/a-radical-attack ... -amendment

In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis signed a law prohibiting private companies from speaking to their employees about certain topics that don't align with DeSantis' political views. The new law, called the STOP Woke Act, went into effect on July 1, 2022.

The STOP Woke Act amends Florida’s Civil Rights Act "to make it unlawful for Florida employers to require employees to undergo training or experience instruction that includes any of eight forbidden 'concepts' regarding race, sex, religion, or national origin."

Prohibited topics include endorsing the concepts of white privilege or male privilege. Specifically, employers cannot conduct trainings that state an individual can be "privileged" or "oppressed" due to their "race, color, sex, or national origin." Further, trainings cannot suggest that anyone should "feel guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress because of actions, in which the individual played no part, committed in the past by other members of the same race, color, sex, or national origin."

Honeyfund, an online wedding registry, and Primo Tampa, a local licensee of Ben & Jerry's ice cream, sued DeSantis and other state officials to block the law.
► Show Spoiler
Too, also:

https://protectdemocracy.org/update/upd ... -woke-act/


"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 3504
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:27 am

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#358

Post by pipistrelle »

If corporations are people, isn’t that a 1st Amendment issue?


User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 9312
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation:: bit twiddler

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#359

Post by raison de arizona »

I can't imagine DeSantis will win this battle, even in DeSantisLand, but tying it up in court for years itself is a victory. Putting "those people" on notice and establishing them as targets? Victories in themselves.


"Take these seeds and put them in your pocket, so at least sunflowers will grow when you all die here."
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 5884
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#360

Post by RTH10260 »

Seems this has been missed on TFB

article from 07/18/2022 , please google for more
Next phase of Nikolas Cruz trial to begin this week: What to know ahead of opening statements
Nikolas Cruz faces life in prison without parole, or the death penalty for killing 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in February 2018.

HANNAH PHILLIPS | Palm Beach Post

FORT LAUDERDALE — It took seven minutes for Nikolas Cruz to kill 17 people inside Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. It'll take at least four months to know whether he'll die because of it.

Beginning this week, a 12-person jury and a Broward County judge will set out to decide the fate of the 23-year-old gunman, who pleaded guilty in October to 17 counts of premeditated first-degree murder and 17 counts of attempted murder. Cruz’s mental health likely will be at the center of the trial.

Testimony from more than 1,000 potential witnesses is expected to push the proceedings into late October. Cruz's team of Broward County public defenders tried to avoid a trial altogether last year by offering his guilty plea in exchange for a life sentence, but the state's lead prosecutor chose to pursue the death penalty, anyway.

Jurors will weigh back-to-back testimony rehashing America's deadliest high school shooting before they can recommend whether Cruz, who lived near Lantana in the weeks before the Parkland attack, deserves to live or die.

Should they recommend execution, the decision must be unanimous. If even one juror votes otherwise, Cruz will receive a mandatory life sentence without a chance of parole.

Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer, who will preside over the trial, will then make the final call on the death sentence.

Capital punishment is legal in Florida. Since 1976, the state has executed 99 convicted murderers, according to The Marshall Project. As of Friday, July 15, 306 people await execution.

A slew of legal complications and controversies has delayed the trial for months, including last-minute motions by the defense to withhold certain graphic evidence from jurors. But the last of the pre-trial hearings ended Wednesday, ushering in the final stage of a penalty trial slated to begin months ago.

Opening statements are scheduled to begin Monday, despite a push by Cruz's defense team to delay the trial in light of recent mass shootings, which they argued could bias the jury.




https://eu.palmbeachpost.com/story/news ... 018078002/


User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 5884
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#361

Post by RTH10260 »

Parkland gunman spent weeks making violent social media posts and searching online for information about mass shootings, testimony shows

By Dakin Andone and Kevin Conlon, CNN
Updated 1619 GMT (0019 HKT) July 28, 2022

(CNN)For months leading up to the Parkland massacre, Nikolas Cruz searched the internet for information and videos about mass shootings, leaving behind YouTube comments expressing his desire to "kill people," according to testimony in the penalty phase of his trial.

Broward County Sheriff's Office Detective Nick Masters, an electronic data analyst, took the stand Wednesday, where he read aloud dozens of Cruz's Google searches, some of which included broad, generic search terms like "murder" or "shooting people."

But Cruz also sought information about specific mass shootings, including those at Virginia Tech, in Las Vegas and at Columbine High School, and the people who carried them out, according to Masters' testimony and a list of posts and searches released by the court. Cruz searched for how many rounds were fired in different mass shootings, as well as information about the weapon used in Las Vegas, Masters testified.

Some of the evidence revealed in court Wednesday was previously known. But the testimony gave jurors tasked with deciding if Cruz is sentenced to death a look at the full breadth of his online posts and searches, underscoring prosecutors' arguments the defendant's decision to carry out the shooting -- in which 17 people were killed and 17 others injured -- was not based on a whim, but calculated and premeditated.

Indeed, other searches appeared to show Cruz's attention narrowing on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, from which he'd been expelled. Almost two weeks before the shooting, the then-19-year-old searched for a map of his former school, the list released by the court shows. The day before the shooting, Cruz searched for "how long does it take for a cop to show up at a school shooting," and on the morning of the day of the shooting, he searched simply, "marjory stoneman douglas."



https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/28/us/n ... index.html


User avatar
northland10
Posts: 3386
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation:: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#362

Post by northland10 »

raison de arizona wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 12:02 pm I can't imagine DeSantis will win this battle, even in DeSantisLand, but tying it up in court for years itself is a victory. Putting "those people" on notice and establishing them as targets? Victories in themselves.
It is a grift for political points and cash. As always it is set up in a way that allows for multiple grifting moments.

1. Announce the bill
2. If the bill is defeated, complain about the left that defeated the bill, if it succeeds, trumpet the success (either result is a win-win)
3. Law is challenged in court - complain about outsiders and leftists.
4. Law is tossed - more grifting
5. Announce a new bill, and repeat the process

One area of danger, though:

1. Law survives challenge.. oh shit.. need to find new grift
2, While looking for a new grift, find an outrage moment where companies actually use the law against the right. This does not actually require facts.


User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 5884
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#363

Post by RTH10260 »

Judge blocks enforcement of N.C. law that demands truth in campaign ads
The state's attorney general was in danger of being prosecuted for airing a possibly untruthful ad in 2020.

By ASSOCIATED PRESS
07/25/2022 08:21 PM EDT

RALEIGH, N.C. — A federal judge agreed on Monday to block for now any enforcement of a state law in a political ad investigation of North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein’s campaign, saying it’s likely to win on legal claims that the law is unconstitutional.

Following a court hearing in Greensboro, U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles ruled for Stein’s campaign and other plaintiffs who filed an unusual lawsuit last week against State Board of Elections members and Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman.

The temporary restraining order that Eagles signed means that Freeman’s office is prevented from using that law to prosecute anyone associated with a 2020 commercial that the Democratic incumbent aired against then-Republican challenger Jim O’Neill.

The law prohibits anyone from knowingly publishing or circulating false information about a candidate with the intent of hurting that candidate’s chances in the election. It enabled an ongoing investigation into the Stein commercial, which focused on untested rape kits held by local law enforcement agencies.

O’Neill’s campaign cited the law in his September 2020 election board complaint against Stein’s campaign committee over the ad. That led to interviews by board investigators, while the State Bureau of Investigation later talked to Stein, his campaign staff and a woman who appeared in the ad. The plaintiffs called the law overbroad and outdated and said it fails to protect core political speech, leading it to violate the First Amendment.




https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/2 ... k-00047833


User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 3504
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:27 am

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#364

Post by pipistrelle »

I'd use that in my campaign. My opponent opposes truth.

Although that doesn't seem to be that big a deal anymore.


User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 9312
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation:: bit twiddler

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#365

Post by raison de arizona »

Ah, Stephen King, a national treasure.

:snippity:


"Take these seeds and put them in your pocket, so at least sunflowers will grow when you all die here."
User avatar
Dr. Ken
Posts: 1105
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:12 pm
Contact:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#366

Post by Dr. Ken »

oops


ImageImagePhilly Boondoggle
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 9312
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation:: bit twiddler

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#367

Post by raison de arizona »

tl;dr - Had the plaintiff counsel actually played the game, they would have quickly realized that the complaint was frivolous. Whoopsie daisy.
Lawyer Sanctioned for Failing to Play Call of Duty
:snippity:
After receiving the Complaint . . . , I played the entire single-player campaign of Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare. . . .

Based on my research, . . . it was immediately apparent to me that many (if not virtually all) of the factual allegations in the Complaint were not accurate. It also was immediately apparent that Plaintiff’s counsel could not have played Infinite Warfare (or any Call of Duty game, for that matter) and filed the Complaint in good faith. For example, anyone playing the game for more than a few minutes would realize that “Sean Brooks” is not the “main character” of the game . . . and Sean Brooks the game character does not look anything like Shon Brooks.4

Brooks did not withdraw the complaint and instead opposed the motion for sanctions. Among other things, Brooks contended: “Rule 11 does not impose a specific requirement that would have required plaintiff’s counsel here to personally play the entire six-hour campaign of the Call of Duty game in order to conduct a reasonable pre-filing investigation.”5

On July 12, 2022, the court granted Activision’s motions, dismissed the Complaint with prejudice, and ordered the plaintiff’s counsel to reimburse Activision for the reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs that it incurred in the litigation.6 The court concluded that the “Plaintiff's counsel failed to conduct a reasonable pre-filing inquiry into the relevant facts” alleged in the Complaint because, among other things, Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare “is a first-person shooter game, not first-and third-person as alleged, and Sean Brooks does not conduct a scripted battle scene in a high fashion couture shopping mall. Plaintiff's counsel could have easily verified these facts prior to filing the factually baseless Complaint, just as the Court easily verified them within the first hour and a half of playing the game.”7

Sometimes, playing a game is its own reward. At other times, it is required by Rule 11.
:snippity:
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/lawye ... y-4233820/


"Take these seeds and put them in your pocket, so at least sunflowers will grow when you all die here."
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 9312
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation:: bit twiddler

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#368

Post by raison de arizona »

OK, this is interesting. I've only had a chance to skim it, but they tried to name an AI system as the inventor on a patent. No go. VA.
:snippity:
This case presents the question of who, or what, can be
an inventor. Specifically, we are asked to decide if an artificial intelligence (AI) software system can be listed as the
inventor on a patent application. At first, it might seem
that resolving this issue would involve an abstract inquiry
into the nature of invention or the rights, if any, of AI systems. In fact, however, we do not need to ponder these metaphysical matters. Instead, our task begins – and ends –
with consideration of the applicable definition in the relevant statute.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO)
undertook the same analysis and concluded that the Patent
Act defines “inventor” as limited to natural persons; that
is, human beings. Accordingly, the PTO denied Stephen
Thaler’s patent applications, which failed to list any human as an inventor. Thaler challenged that conclusion in
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia,
which agreed with the PTO and granted it summary judgment. We, too, conclude that the Patent Act requires an
“inventor” to be a natural person and, therefore, affirm.
:snippity:
https://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orde ... 988142.pdf


"Take these seeds and put them in your pocket, so at least sunflowers will grow when you all die here."
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 4908
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: TOP SECRET Fogbow HQ
Occupation:: muttering and puttering

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#369

Post by Foggy »

When we get real AIs, actual sentient machines, it won't matter whether their inventions are patented.

How are the silly humans going to steal technology they don't even understand in the first place? :think: :confuzzled:


We are NOT going back! - Nancy Pelosi
Mood: deciduous
User avatar
Azastan
Posts: 1339
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:48 pm

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#370

Post by Azastan »

Has anyone seen this?

https://www.mysuncoast.com/2022/07/08/s ... materials/

Plaintiff is apparently a sovereign citizen of some sort, but what's the purpose of the suit being filed with him as a Natural Person blah blah blah?


User avatar
Frater I*I
Posts: 1731
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:52 am
Location: City of Dis, Sixth Circle of Hell

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#371

Post by Frater I*I »

Azastan wrote: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:14 pm Has anyone seen this?

https://www.mysuncoast.com/2022/07/08/s ... materials/

Plaintiff is apparently a sovereign citizen of some sort, but what's the purpose of the suit being filed with him as a Natural Person blah blah blah?
To prove to the court that he's not the "Juristic Corporate Fiction" that is represented when his name is in all capital letters...


Gazer Into the SovCit Abyss
User avatar
Dr. Ken
Posts: 1105
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:12 pm
Contact:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#372

Post by Dr. Ken »

Didn't know where to put this but I've been tracking this story since the beginning


ImageImagePhilly Boondoggle
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 5884
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#373

Post by RTH10260 »

Emmett Till: woman whose accusation led to lynching will not be charged
Mississippi grand jury declines to indict Carolyn Bryant Donham over death of Black teenager nearly 70 years ago

Associated Press in Greenwood, Mississippi
Tue 9 Aug 2022 20.00 BST

A grand jury in Mississippi has declined to indict the white woman whose accusation set off the lynching of Black teenager Emmett Till nearly 70 years ago, despite revelations about an unserved arrest warrant and a newly revealed memoir by the woman, a prosecutor said on Tuesday.

A grand jury in Leflore county in the north-western part of the state considered evidence and testimony regarding Carolyn Bryant Donham’s involvement in the kidnapping and death of Till, the local district attorney, Dewayne Richardson, said in a news release.

After hearing more than seven hours of testimony from investigators and witnesses, the grand jury determined that there was not sufficient evidence to indict Donham, Richardson said. The panel also considered charges of kidnapping and manslaughter.

The news that the grand jury had declined to charge Donham makes it increasingly unlikely that she will ever be prosecuted for her role in the events that led to Till’s death.




https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... no-charges


Dave from down under
Posts: 1884
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#374

Post by Dave from down under »

Reminds me to post this.,

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2019/9/2 ... talk-about

The Hokorana planned “self defense” shooting - hung jury ;(


User avatar
KickahaOta
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 9:17 pm

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#375

Post by KickahaOta »

A case that manages to be both darkly funny and really interesting: US v. Anthony Oisoni Ozomaro.
District Court docket (RECAP)
Appellate court docket (PACER)

Mr. Ozomaro was charged with meth-related crimes. He was in rather bad mental shape and had to undergo a psychological evaluation, but he was ultimately found competent to stand trial. He then demanded to represent himself, which was granted. Judging from this "Order to Dismiss" he later submitted, he seems to have taken at least a brief mental dip in the sovcit pool as well:
Eye am demanding imediate dismissal of underlining quote ‘criminal offense,’ Eyam being charged with. Eye am not a ‘Pupil’ of the United State and am not subject to United State Jurisdiction. The Underlined ‘Criminal Offense’ Eye am being “charged” with is a Extraterritorial event and Iam demanding my Extraterritoriality. Eye am further more demanding my release from this United State banking institute, where eye am illegally being held for financial gain against my will. Eye will no longer be complying with ‘United States’ ‘Govern-mental’ (Mind Control) Programing or proceedings.
At the start of the trial (the opening day of jury selection), Mr. Ozomaro refused to leave his cell. This obviously presented a conundrum. Ultimately the judge found that Mr. Ozomaro forfeited his right to self-representation; the trial was rescheduled and ultimately held.

And at that point things got more interesting.
The government presented its case over the course of two days, after which the jury retired to deliberate. After six hours of deliberations, the district court received a note stating, “We have not reached an agreement. We cannot come to a unanimous decision.” The court gave an Allen instruction, and the jury returned to deliberations. Less than two hours later, the jury sent another note stating, “We are unable to reach a unanimous decision today. We would like all transcripts of the witnesses for deliberation 10/23/2019.” The court informed the jurors that official transcripts were not available, and instructed them to continue deliberations the following day.
The next morning, the district court informed the parties of new developments that occurred overnight. First, one of the jurors had informed a court staff member that she observed a male juror drinking alcohol during lunch two days prior. The juror also stated that “the same individual hates the Government and doesn’t believe anything they say.” Second, another juror had called the district court chambers to ask if “it was legal to drink on lunch break,” and commented that “a juror openly admitted bias to the Government.”
Over Ozomaro’s objection, the court separately questioned each juror to determine the extent of the alleged misconduct. At the beginning of each interview, the judge cautioned, “I don’t want to know anything about the state of the deliberations . . . or how your voting stands.” The judge then continued to ask some variation of the following questions: “Have you participated in, observed, or heard any misconduct either by yourself or another juror?” and “Have there been any actions or statements that violate your oath as a juror or that is different from what was said in open court during voir dire as to your oath and your responsibilities?” Seven of the twelve jurors answered affirmatively.
All seven jurors were making largely the same complaints about the same juror, Juror 109. Meanwhile, Juror 109 himself denied any incidents of misconduct.
Based on these accounts, the district court excused Juror 109. The court found that the consumption of alcohol did not constitute “good cause” to excuse the juror. It reasoned that “the [jurors who] observed it all talk about a 20-ounce drink or maybe a 24-ounce drink . . . I didn’t hear anything that would indicate that it was so much consumption that it would affect any sort of deliberations.” However, the court determined that the bias against the government and the lack of candor to the court constituted “good cause” to excuse the juror. The court found that “it’s not a credibility of these particular witnesses[,] . . . [but] a bias in general against certain witnesses and evidence[.]” The court further explained, “after taking two oaths, . . . this same juror was not truthful in voir dire to the Court as it relates to that bias, nor was he truthful to the Court this morning as it relates to that bias.” The court then replaced Juror 109 with an alternate juror and instructed the jury “to start completely brand new.” Approximately three hours later, the jury returned a guilty verdict. The district court subsequently sentenced Ozomaro to 168 months’ imprisonment, and this timely appeal followed.
The appellate opinion then goes into a really interesting discussion of the delicacy of handling a holdout juror who also seems to be biased or refusing to deliberate. A misbehaving juror can normally be replaced; but if the apparent misbehavior is motivated by a belief that the evidence is insufficient to convict, then replacing the juror would obviously damage the right to have a jury trial in the first place. The Sixth Circuit panel mulls this over, considers the views of other circuits, and ultimately settles on a 'reasonable possibility' standard: if there's a reasonable possibility that the juror's intransigence is based on the juror's view of the evidence, then the juror can be replaced. And in Ozomaro's case, the panel decides that this standard is met: Juror 109's behavior was based solely on a preexisting bias against the government, not on the evidence in the case.


Post Reply

Return to “Law and Lawsuits”