The prosecution is scared shitless that the concept of Jury Nullification will become mainstream, and if the Cirizens realize they can just release anyone they want to, then MAGA won't be able to win their bullshit cases.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Let's be honest, you'll never get a jury that at least 1 person doesn't vote guilty, so it would be a hung jury. Thus he would spend life in prison blowing through all his families money continuously going back to court getting tried for murder over and over. He'd die in prison and his family would give up on him eventually because face it... The system already beat him.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

In practice that's now how hung juries work, even for high-profile cases. No DA wants to have the shame of repeatedly trying the same trial, even if double jeopardy doesn't apply. At some point it looks to the voters that you're just wasting taxpayer resources.

Instead what tends to happen is that the charges get less severe with each trial, and that the defendant gets a better plea offer each time. For example, maybe Mangione gets a hung jury for the capital murder trial. In the next trial they charge him in a way the death penalty isn't on the table. If first degree murder fails, the next trial they charge him with second degree murder. It becomes easier to get a conviction with each trial, as jurors are less likely to practice jury nullification as the stakes of the trial decrease.

Eventually the defendant just accepts a plea deal. Every trial is still a roll of the dice for the defendant. If he kept getting hung juries, maybe eventually Mangione accepts a plea deal for manslaughter.

No one wants to do infinite trials. The prosecutor doesn't want to seem weak or a waster of taxpayer resources. The defendant doesn't want to keep rolling the dice with their life. With each passing trial, the charges decrease. With each trial, conviction becomes easier. Eventually the defendant just accepts a plea deal to eliminate the possibility of spending the rest of their life in prison.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

The prosecutor won't care if it wastes tax dollars or about the image of the case having been hung. Trump will publicly smear the jury members on live television that dont vote guilty. Fox will call them all leftist terrorists who are a threat to our country.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

You need to apply more critical thinking and consider the actual motivations prosecutors are under. It does no good to just model your adversaries as infinitely powerful demons and assume they have the will and capacity to do all the evil all the time. It makes you incapable of rational thought.

There are very real downsides to a prosecutor bringing a case again and again. Downsides that actually hurt their goals.

With each trial the evidence gets less fresh.
With each trial the prosecutor seems to more of the public as the villain.
With enough trials defendants can start making legal claims based on due process grounds (not double jeopardy grounds.)
Every trial is a roll of the dice that the jury will return a full verdict of not guilty, rather than merely a hung jury.
With each trial the popularity of the defendant increases, upping political pressure on the prosecutor.
After enough trials, the governor will be under pressure to just grant the defendant a pardon.
With more and more trials, the prosecutor risks completely destroying their career. They risk being seen as an incompetent clown who either can't get a conviction or is too dumb to realize when he doesn't have a case.

You can assume the prosecutor is evil if you want. But that doesn't mean you can pretend that the prosecutors still aren't mortal human beings with the same worldly pressures as anyone else. And despite Trump's verbal diarrhea, federal prosecutors have had to abandon countless cases due to lack of evidence, Trump's tantrums be damned.

Even if you assume the prosecutor is willing to do anything to get the maximum conviction possible, they still will not endlessly try defendants. Each trial makes a conviction more unlikely. Which is why charges get watered down and plea offers get more generous.

[–] SleeplessCityLights@lemmy.ca 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

This DOJ does not give a shit about optics, they control the optics. They will just do infinite trials.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 5 points 20 hours ago

They don't care about optics? Really? The same guys who lie whenever an ICE shooting happens to immediately portray the victim as a criminal? The same guys who changed the names to the Department of War and the Gulf of America? The same guys that launch political prosecutions they know will never succeed (like the reflecting pool cases), just to sooth Trump's ego?

These clowns are void of substance. They're nothing but optics.

[–] beejboytyson@lemmy.world -2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Rofl wow sweet summer child prosecutors put all kind of innocent people in jail. Please think before you speak. Wasting tax money is the norm.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

https://thelegalguide.org/how-often-can-hung-jury-lead-retrial/

I'm just describing how hung juries work and the pressures involved on both prosecution and defendant. Maybe you should think before you speak. And start by not being a pompous ass.

[–] beejboytyson@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago

You still never addressed my comment about prosecutors. Please educate yourself.

[–] DioramaOfShit@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Can't be tried for a crime more than once. Otherwise oj would be in prison.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 0 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

A hung jury doesnt count as being tried, it's declared moot and they just try you again with another jury. Aka if 1 person in jury believes he did kill the guy like I said in my post. Prison forever.