366
submitted 2 years ago by Wilshire@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 years ago

To be fair, getting an impartial jury in this case is a lot harder than it would be normally.

[-] st3ph3n@midwest.social 18 points 2 years ago

That's what happens when the defendant is a polarizing fascist asshole.

[-] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago

Maybe, but that's not a crime and he shouldn't be punished for it.

[-] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

He chose to have a jury trial. Juries are inherently biased. It's impossible for anyone to have missed the past 8 years of almost daily coverage of the dumb things he says and does.

[-] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

No idea why you got downvoted. Nearly everyone will know who he is, since he was the damn President of the country. Nearly everyone will know a lot of stuff about him, since he never fucking shuts up on social media. He has a large percentage of the country who loves him and a larger percentage of people who absolutely hate him. Finally, the case and jury selection is in New York, where he has been in the news for 40 years.

[-] UnpluggedFridge@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

People seem to think that a prior opinion about the dependent automatically means that a potential juror cannot be impartial. All that is required is that the juror can render a verdict based solely on the evidence presented at trial. Plenty of people with strong opinions about Trump himself can still be impartial jurors.

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yup. And those 10 strikes are for exactly that. If you can’t prove a juror will be biased but suspect they will be, then you can use one of your 10 strikes to exclude them. But you have an unlimited amount of “for cause” strikes, where the juror has admitted that they wouldn’t be able to stay impartial.

[-] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago

I'm not sure that's true. Even a person with a great deal of integrity and respect for the law is going to be biased subconsciously to some extent by the knowledge that this case may change the outcome of a particularly important presidential election. A person whose respect for the law is less than absolute may even consider affecting the outcome of the election to be a moral obligation.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Hi government please choose me as juror I definitely will not intentionally give him the maximum sentence

[-] TheRedSpade@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

The sentence isn't determined by the jury.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago
[-] magnetosphere@fedia.io 5 points 2 years ago

I agree. Trump has done everything possible to spread his propaganda and poison the jury pool.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

That’s why they’re not allowed to ask nix people for being biased.

Everyone already has their opinions. The best they can do is look for people that aren’t dogmatic.

this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
366 points (96.9% liked)

News

36384 readers
839 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS