The third day of deliberations Wednesday follows a jury note to the judge Tuesday afternoon saying members had deadlocked. He told them to keep working.
Porter faces manslaughter, assault, reckless endangerment and misconduct in office stemming from Gray's death. Prosecutors say Porter is partially responsible for Gray's death for failing to buckle the man into a seatbelt and not calling an ambulance when he indicated he was in distress. Porter told jurors he didn't think Gray was injured, and that it was the van driver's responsibility to fasten Gray's seat belt.
Source
Of course they are struggling. This was without any doubt a slam dunk acquittal. This proves that some jurors minds were made up pre trial for conviction. This trial should have- again without any doubts- been moved out of that city and if that fly by night affirmative action fool of a judge had he an honest bone in his body would have moved the trial. I hope and pray that those jurors will stand firm and not change to guilty. This officer did nothing wrong much less anything criminal and anyone who thinks he did is a worthless POS just like Freddie Gray was.
ReplyDeleteProof positive these cops cant get a fair trial in Baltimore. Based on the evidence presented, it was obvious this cop did nothing wrong. I guess there a couple jurors who dont want their neighboorhood burned down again.
ReplyDeleteI would even settle for a mistrial and subsequent decision not to try him again.
ReplyDeleteThey know that an aquittal means riots and they don't want that on their conscience
ReplyDeleteshut up ed
ReplyDeleteThey are scared to acquit knowing they will be the ones that lead to the rioting and burning for Christmas.
ReplyDeleteThis is why affirmative action needs to go. Both the judge and the states attorney are obvious products of AA. Not anyone with a functioning brain can in good conscious have wanted this trial held anywhere near Baltimore. Even just the potential of a target put on the backs of any juror should have been enough to change the venue.
ReplyDeletethe unconfirmed story now doing the rounds is hung on 3/4.
ReplyDeleteaccording to experts that would indicate agreement on not guilty on manslaughter-in order to get to manslaughter you have to conclude misconduct and reckless endangerment
hung on assault, misconduct and reckless endangerment same as above:
in order to get to assault you would have to have concluded prior he was guilty of misconduct and reckless endangerment
any agreed upon charges whether acquittal or conviction stand.
ReplyDeleteprosecution wants Porter to testify in the next trial van driver Goodson. *If* jury hangs on any of the charges and state wants to retry, Porter does not have to testify while awaiting trial. Goodson's trial up next scheduled for 1/6/16
Right 10:38. I've been listening to Baltimore talk radio and reading many different message boards and everything else related to this. The expert opinion is that if the jury did find him guilty of manslaughter in order to get there, they would have had to find him guilty of the 3 lessor charges. Same goes for assault-they would have then had to find him guilty of the 2 lessor charges. It's still anyone's guess at this point in time. They could be deadlocked on all the charges which is my hope.
ReplyDeletebreaking we have a buzz from jury
ReplyDeleteOfc William Porter sits awaiting word from jury in his manslaughter trial on bench in courthouse hallway, next to his mother, Helena Porter.
ReplyDeletejury wanted a transcript of witness testimony-denied they have to go off memory
ReplyDeleteThe denial of the transcripts is appropriate. Jury can review the evidence but not testimony. What was interesting is that the prosecution was allowed to play back portions of trial testimony during their closing. That's can be called to put it mildly, unique.
ReplyDeleteIt should be noted that transcripts are NOT evidence, they are actually hearsay because they were transcribed by someone. The recordings are the actual evidence.
ReplyDeleteThe problem could be it was difficult to hear and possibly accurately understand the recording of Porter's statement.
FYI. The jury can find this innocent man guilty on any of the charges or just one. Example he could be found gulilty on assault and not guilty on everything else doesn't matter. Fact not fiction.
ReplyDelete1225. Wrong. Is evidence bc it's under oath.
ReplyDelete1:38 transcripts of recorded interviews, etc are not evidence. No one was under oath. The recordings themselves are the evidence. There was no stipulation----both sides agree evidence is fair representation--- entered as to accuracy of demonstrative transcripts of Porter's statement or witness testimony, so those aren't evidence. This is why jurors should take notes.
ReplyDeletejurors have buzzed
ReplyDeletemosby's arrived
Of course they can 1:32, jurors can do almost anything though a judge can 'undo' remember the nanny trial of years ago?
ReplyDeletebut.....in order to find him guilty of either or the 2 more serious charges they would have to have found that he was guilty also of misconduct AND reckless endangerment
in a plea they merge the charges
in other words if you kill someone by repeated blows to the head and you are found guilty of murder of course it took an assault to kill the person so you are also guilty of assault
Mistrial! judge accepts jury couldn't agree
ReplyDeletehung on all 4 charges
ReplyDeleteWhen I was on a jury they told us in no uncertain terms to pay attention and take notes, because other than evidence that has been officially entered into the record our notes would be all that we had to go on as far as testimony. They said what the court reporter was transcribing was not evidence.
ReplyDeleteJury nullification just happened here.
ReplyDeleteNo riots.
No conviction.
Win for the City.
Bring in the next dealer.
9:52 PM
ReplyDeletelol you have no clue what you are talking about. go back and watch the youtube video again.