Hey everyone, I haven’t seen this posted so I wanted to ask. If the jury comes back hung, can the judge dismiss or throw out the case with prejudice? Or can she only declare a mistrial?
I do wonder if it’s a hung jury, can the judge or prosecutor see if it was like 11-1 NG or 10-2 not guilty? If so, would they say we’re not going to retry.
yes, I think they can poll them and see what it was. With the Michael Chesna case (another cop who died) it was 11 for guilty and one juror who apparently refused to deliberate. So they retried and got a guilty verdict. (In that case it was clear who shot him, it was just a matter of whether he was mentally impaired at the time.)
I don't think that's allowed in this jurisdiction, but they can probably find out what the split number is, just not in what, if any, direction they're leaning.
It only takes one juror to reveal the split. Personally I think it's majority guilty as the evidence is beyond sufficient to support guilty. If it's majority not guilty I don't expect the state to bring the case again unless something drastic can be done to remove influence on the jury.
Sounds like there was a couple for guilty, but majority was NG. There was so much reasonable doubt it was overwhelming. Maybe Jackson will include all of that in his next closing.
There was no reasonable doubt that Karen Read struck him with her vehicle. There is no evidence pointing to anyone else being responsible for his injury and damage to her car.
Can you explain to me where is the evidence that his injuries are caused by a car? Because the injuries he had are not from a motor vehicle accident?
By process of elimination his injuries must have been caused by the car. For instance Karen's vehicle backs up at 24 miles an hour and then his phone stops moving. Did you know that?
That’s not an accurate statement. The phone move 80 steps after KR left the Albert’s home. Experts hired by the CW indicated the injuries were inconsistent with being strict by the SUV. That’s reasonable doubt!
Apparently, we didn’t watch the same trial.
I thought a judge could rule on the case if they wanted to in a case like this where even if the Jury found her guilty there is overwhelming evidence it would get overturned in an appellate court. The Judge could simply declare not guilty or dismiss the case with prejudice.
She would have done that after the CW rested and the defense asked her too based on the lack of evidence.
Oh yeah I forgot about that
I just don’t see how this jury can’t come to the conclusion of reasonable doubt. The dog bites on the arm said it all IMO
I think it’s one hold out and they are completely prejudice in some aspect. Because there was not just a little doubt, every aspect of this case was doubt after doubt after doubt.
I’m not convinced it’s just one hold out but I have found it interesting how the jurors are described as having “deeply held beliefs” and especially the mention of their “worldviews”.
This, to me, implies that the jury is struggling on a fundamental level because of long held beliefs and biases. A fundamental way of seeing the world which doesn’t permit any possibility of a change mind. I think this is something the court would ideally seek to avoid in jury selection, no?
They should be looking at the evidence-or lack of it- to decide this case,instead of their world views
The big-ass downside of a jury of your peers; they’re almost always going to let their beliefs and biases sway their decision.
I agree!!
Didn’t the judge admonish them, saying they had to review all the evidence? Maybe they are seriously doing that.
I think what these jurors also don’t know because it hasn’t been explained to them is they can return verdicts on some of the charges they DO agree on (if they even have agreed on anything) so at least if they’re only hung on one charge then the CW won’t have to retry ALL the charges, only the one they couldn’t agree on.
I thought I heard this on canton confidential, but I think a guest on there said the juror could not return verdicts for some charges. It has to be all or nothing. Again I could have heard this wrong.
Darn I hope that’s not the case.
Let’s hope so!
There is literally zero evidence to support a dog bite besides some attention seeking retired ER doctor claiming so who hadn't even read the DNA reports showing no dog DNA. If John was hit through his shirt there would be DNA all over it. That's why the defense was calling them scratches for so long since nails don't have as much DNA.
Also Johns phone never moved and there were 10 witness who didn't see him enter the home so there was no dog attack.
except for the dog bites.......
There were no dog bites. If you can do a test where a dog bites a man's arm through a sweatshirt and leaves no DNA I would love to see that since your side apparently The Science Team
I feel the split is 8-4. The language of their note was pretty strong and telling of a deep divide that they can’t overcome imo. I think the DA will absolutely re try; they’ve dug themselves in this hole of wanting to make a point this wasn’t a cover up and will want to stand their ground on that. What I feel is getting lost in all this is that at the end of day a police officer was murdered, no one would just let that go without getting an answer.
I cannot FATHOM more than one hold out. Truly. I have to think there are strong prejudices being held because you can’t look at the evidence and not have doubt. You would have to play mental gymnastics to arrive to the conclusion that she is guilty without reasonable doubt.
Judge Cannone would declare a mistrial if the jury communicates to the court it is still deadlocked after the court charges them under Tuey Rodriguez. Assuming the jury comes back intact and ready to go this am, we could still see a verdict (s).
Simplified, the court has one more shot, but that’s it. If the court declares a mistrial all charges might be dismissed based on any verdict(s) and the decision to re indict KR lies solely with DA Morrissey.
Are charges dismissed? There was a linked article I believe from the Boston Globe that said it would go to pending. I did not understand what that meant, or for how long it can remain in pending status, but that thread was locked so I could not get clairification.
Not an MA practitioner, and afaik, that refers to the State retrying the case under the same indictment, so that MIGHT be true, however, I’m of the opinion they could not for the man 2 charge. Effectively as she’s on bond anyway, there’s likely a statutory time limit imposed (30-90 days) to docket the case.
this ^ there is a time limit for them to retry the case. unless she waives her right to a speedy trial (she shouldn't) they'd pretty much have to do it all over again pretty quickly. personally, i'm hoping the feds intervene before then.
I know federal charges they have 70 days to retry the case, not sure about MA
If you’ve got a mistrial in a Fed case that’s a win LOL
Do you think the DA will take into account where the jury was landing on guilt? Or just automatically retry this case?
I definitely think the DA will consider whatever the jury split was/is, as well as if any verdict(s) are rendered.
I’m one of those folks that think the family intends to attempt civil litigation following the disposition of the criminal matter. They would have to do that quickly, prior to any decision/ announcement of re indictment.
What are your thoughts on this case? I really enjoyed your commentary/opinions on the Jennifer Dulos board.
Thank you Pale, if you click on my profile and then comments you can read them or search them.
I would point out to others unfamiliar with The State of CT v Michelle Troconis I also came into that case with an open mind, never read a filing outside of the AA’s and ended up firmly on the side of the States theory and Troconis guilt as charged.
This case was covered by dateline and received a lot of media attention. I'm surprised you hadn't heard anything. I live in MA and it was always in the media.
Lol I heard about it on Tik Tok right before the trial started!
Are you talking about the Jen Dulos murder.
No I've known about Dulos for years. I somehow missed hearing about this one
Ok, I was referring to that one not The KR trial.
When do the jury go back this morning? 9 am? 10 am?
9am est
Did they start early today? 8:30 it would seem
I checked Law and Crime, it still says 9am. I haven’t checked any other feed yet though.
I’m sick of this trial. There will never be justice. The DA will definitely try again. What a waste.
This judge won’t throw it out. Some of the way she acted during the trial, makes me think this.
We’re on the brink of Tuey Rodriguez being read right now! She just called a small recess. And the jury is going to come in and they will be instructed on TR.
No, she had that chance after the commonwealth rested.
She had her chances to do that before the trial when the defence filed a motion to dismiss on grounds of prosecutorial misconduct and deception during the indictment and then again after the prosecution rested it's case-in-chief and the defence filed a motion for directed verdict on the grounds that the prosecution had presented insufficient evidence for any rational jury to come to a unanimous guilty verdict (which turns out to be q.e.d.)
So... no.
It wouldn’t be this judge’s first mistrial from a deadlocked jury. A trial involving the murder of a police officer and a bystander was deadlocked by one juror. It was retried with a guilty verdict.
Not coming out of the house ; with all that commotion of trying to resuscitate someone in your front yard. Beyond the definition of cowards. I think 999,000% of the people would go out in the front yard if they saw a body and CPR and 11 cop cars fire trucks and ambulances. WTF. “If I have the story correct”
Imagine the anxiety if the jury decided to turn the verdict Wednesday afternoon so they get next day off at their work? Last time people said would be friday after lunch for the same reason, and bingo.
They do get the 4th off. It’s a federal holiday. Court is closed.
Moderator removed comment
2d
No, the average working class person doesn't get 4th of July off. All retail, restaurant, and general everday services are still in operation that day.
If the jury is deadlocked on all the charges, then it would be dismissed and the prosecutor would have to decide if they want to bring charges again. With the federal investigation revealing more and more about the flaws in the investigation, that seems unlikely as the defense would likely have everything handed to them by the feds. If the jury is unanimous on a few charges but deadlocked on others, then the NG verdicts of the unanimous charges would mean those charges cannot be retried I believe.
Morrissey will most likely retry! Just because of the way he is acting and came out with the statement of the Albert’s. Although he is supposed to retire so he could wait until another DA gets elected.
What was his statement about the Alberts?
This was before the trial but he basically said the Alberts are upstanding citizens and KR is guilty lol
That people are intimidating them and it needs to stop. This was a while ago
I believe judges can declare mistrials “with prejudice,” but that usually only happens if the prosecutor causes a mistrial intentionally.
Karen should watch that RBF
Ahh yes so people can start complaining she looks too happy🙄
True!!
Easier said than done. She’s probably doing the best she can.
And it’s too late now!
What is the RFB?
"Resting Bitch Face" is usually what that means.
5 missing replies
the judge can't do that. Only the prosecution can decide not to retry.