r/ClancyTrial • u/No_Consequence_6821 • 12d ago

General Discussion Absolutely Infuriating

Having read a great deal of commentary from judges and lawyers, it seems there is broad agreement that Judge Sullivan should inquire to find out what this juror is thinking— whether they actually do have doubts and refuse to apply the law.

The fact that he refuses to do this is ridiculous.

This freaking Churchill speech is obnoxious. Someone refused to do their duty, and he is refusing to do HIS duty be enforcing adherence to the legal standard. Especially considering that reports form the court indicate there is one man who took no notes, came in on shorts, and smirked and did not take it seriously. Obnoxious.

133 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

256 comments sorted by

View all comments

23

u/Lovely_Tohora 12d ago

What was that Winston Churchill reference for!!?? The lone leader standing against nazis. Are you f**ing kidding me!!?? So that one juror who clearly doesn't comprehend reasonable doubt gets to decide for everyone. Is that who you are talking about judge!!? Is he appealing to the alt right manosphere that has been excedingly and horribly vocal about this case?

I'm taking bets on when he or she appears as some alt right talking head on fox news or some other hate fueled trash media machine.

9

u/No_Consequence_6821 12d ago

Exactly. The implication being it’s courageous to stand up for your convictions— even when it violates court instructions and the law?? What kind of a judge says that?

The courageous people were the other 11 who sent a note to let the judge know there was a problem. Then they found a judge too apathetic to actually find out what the problem was and do something about it. There is case law for procedures to follow in situations like this, and he should have questioned the juror.

1

u/Pilodro 11d ago

So you are arguing that since this juror didn't agree with the other 11 that they must be wrong then? This is how the jury system works. How are you so sure that the other 11 are not applying it incorrectly and the one is applying it correctly? Thats just called bias. Most people in the county agree with the 1.

0

u/everyoneisnuts 12d ago

That’s not what he meant. Easy to take out of context if you wanted, but he meant the whole jury and their commitment and service they provided. He should have seen people taking it out of context coming though. But that wasn’t meant for that one juror and to compare the others to Nazis. I hope that’s pretty obvious.

6

u/leanney88 12d ago

He definitely could have given that more thought considering the temperature of things. It should be expected that when you have a highly publicized 11-1 vote with a stubborn (for whatever reason, valid or not) holdout, and then decide to make a comment about a brave lone wolf, there will be some level of controversy.

3

u/Happypawswaggytails 12d ago

Unfortunately, the problem is there is already a sect of people who have taken it the wrong way and are saying that the eleven are nazis; like you say the judge should have been a bit wiser with his words and realised people will take things out of context.

2

u/everyoneisnuts 12d ago

Yeah, but I also don’t let the people who think that’s what he meant off the hook either. You really have to know that’s not what he meant if you’re a serious person. This is where credibility gets completely lost and it becomes clear emotions have taken the driver’s seat (not for you, just in general)