Speaking of alternate jurors. On one case I was selected for the jury panel. I was the 12th seat. They had 2 (maybe 3) alternates. I assumed I was juror #12. However, the judge decided the alternates randomly (via computer picked a couple names to determine who w/b alternate jurors). It surprised all of us. Fortunately I WAS on the jury panel but yea, the alternates were not able to deliberate with us.

I get pissed off at the legal system sometimes but have always found it interesting.


TIS

I never heard of that being done, TIS. Part of the strategy of voir dire is to determine the alternates fromthe deliberating panel. An attorney may waive a strike or bury one deeper in the venire to position the alternates you want. By randomly selecting the two alternates from the selected panel frustrates that objective.

It can raise a constitutional challenge if the randomly selected alternates are members of a same minority class as a criminal defendant.

I don't get it either Kly. I remember thinking I would be on the panel, and then when they said "ok now will pick the alternates" I was disappointed because I wanted to be on the panel (I find it very interesting). I assumed juros 13 & 14 WERE the alternates. I may be off on the exact technique they used, BUT they definitely picked the two alternates in some random form.



TIS

California law and criminal procedure may allow for all that. States differ somewhat.

There's another Castle Doctrine murder case in process now in Texas. Again, someone went looking for someone with a gun and one person is dead as a result.

PHOENIX (AP) — A forthcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision on Arizona's controversial immigration law — which some experts believe could uphold the most controversial aspects of the measure — won't end legal disputes on the matter and instead is likely to ignite renewed assaults by the law's opponents.

The court is evaluating the 2010 law on only the question of whether Arizona's attempt to fix its border problems is trumped by federal law. That means that opponents could still ask the courts to block enforcement of the law on other legal grounds.

For example, the high court isn't considering the possibility that racial profiling may arise from the law — because the Obama administration's lawsuit didn't challenge it on those grounds. The administration focused instead on whether federal law supersedes the state law, an issue known as "pre-emption."

http://news.yahoo.com/front-expected-fight-over-arizona-law-165433319.html

FBI: Violent crime rates in the US drop, approach historic lowsBy Andrew Mach, msnbc.com

Violent crime rates in the U.S. are reaching historic lows, according to new FBI data released Monday. Instances of murder declined overall by 1.9 percent from 2010 figures, while rape, robbery and aggravated assault declined by 4 percent nationwide, according to records from more than 14,000 law-enforcement agencies around the country, FBI spokesman Bill Carter told msnbc.com.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/0...toric-lows?lite

Father Allegedly Kills Man Who Molested His Daughter, Texas Cops Say

Sheriff's deputies in Texas won't file charges against a father who they say beat an acquaintance to death after allegedly catching him sexually abusing the man's 4-year-old daughter.

During a social gathering on Saturday, the girl went inside the family's home in Shiner while other members of the family were tending to horses outside, CNN reported.

The father caught a 47-year-old man -- with whom he was casually acquainted -- attempting to molest his daughter, Lavaca County Sheriff Micah Harmon told the Victoria Advocate. The father then allegedly punched the man in the head until he died, Harmon reported.

The father and daughter weren't named to protect the identity of the 4-year-old girl. She was described as "ok, besides the obvious mental trauma" of the incident, Harmon said.

The alleged abuser was found dead at the scene. His name wasn't released pending the announcement of his death to his family.

The sheriff's office will defer to a grand jury to decide whether charges will be brought against the father.

"You have a right to defend your daughter," he told CNN. "[The girl's father] acted in defense of his third person. Once the investigation is completed we will submit it to the district attorney who then submits it to the grand jury, who will decide if they will indict him."

The father was reportedly "very remorseful" about the death and did not know the alleged abuser would die of his injuries.

Source: HuffingtonPost.com

The Sheriff's Department is won't be filing charges, and is deferring to the DA and Grand Jury. Thoughts?

What is the difference between misdemeanor and felony assault?

http://www.cbs8.com/story/18742911/borde...beating-witness

Bodily injury and serious bodily injury. They are usually classified as simple assault and aggravated assault.

Regarding the article above, many states penal codes are unclear about just when deadly force can be legally used. Texas statutes allow for its use to protect the actor, but I haven't come across a fefinition of protect. Kly, can you shed any light on this?

I don't believe that there is a statutory definition of 'protect' in this context. My guess is that the Texas father, who used force to protect his daughter from a sexual assault while it was taking place, would be acquitted, if charged. Of course, the factual analysis, used by prosecutors to determine whether charges should be brought, will focus on reasonableness. If the injuries leading to the attacker's death were incurred in the reasonable scope of protecting the daughter, no charges would be filed. If they conclude that the father continued to fight the attacker after the daughter was secure and the attacker was subdued, then they could determine that the actions were excessive and not protected by self-defense.

Most jurisdictions generally allow the use of deadly force when confronted with deadly force or serious bodily injury, even when the threat of deadly harm or serious injury is to a third person. Sexual assault constitutes serious bodily injury.

In AZ, simply pointing a gun at someone is considered "aggravated assault."

I concur. After rereading the statute, your explanation makes sense. I believe the total of evidence will illustrate that he acted beyond what was necessary to protect his daughter. But then a passion defense could come in, right?

Here's another of those stand your ground fools that was cinvicted of murder today.

http://www.statesman.com/news/nation/tex...xtype=rss_texas

These cases show why the greatest opposition to stand your ground laws came from police and prosecutors. They are designed to encourage conflict.

When I took my CCW (Carry Concealed Weapon) class six years ago, the instructor told us that 80 percent of shooting situations were legally ambiguous, nothwithstanding "Castle Doctrine" and "Stand Your Ground." He wisely emphasized responsibilities as well as rights, and especially when not to shoot vs. when to shoot. His conclusion: "Use the 'Nike Defense'--run!"

Bo knows guns .

Well, Clemons found not guilty of perjury before Congress. I'm not sure for whom that may be a victory or loss overall.

That would be a victory for The Rocket, and a loss for the justice system, IMO.

My ignorance will show but is he one of the sports guys (couldn't tell you what team/sport) accused of using steroids?





TIS

Exactly. I think the prosecution was foolish to bring the charge in the first place. That prosecution amounted to having to prove that he took steroids which was almost impossible to prove.

Only reason the feds prosecuted the case was because both parties in Congress demanded a prosecution after Clemens lied in front of Congress about his steroid use.

The fact of the matter is that Clemens DID do the steroids. The evidence included a needle and cotton with Clemens’s DNA on them that tested positive for steroids. The problem with the prosecution came with the govt's main witness Brian McNamee.

He gave the evidence to investigators by McNamee, who said he saved needles, gauze and vials from one of the injections in 2001. He told jurors he kept some of the items in a Miller Lite beer can that he took from the recycling bin in Clemens’s apartment. He brought the materials home, combined them with other drugs Clemens told him to destroy and placed it all in a FedEx box, he testified.

Under cross-examination, he said the beer can also contained needles kept from injections he gave other ballplayers. That admission allowed Clemens’s lawyers attack the credibility of the government’s only physical evidence. The defense portrayed McNamee as a liar who manipulated the evidence he provided.

Hopefully they dont waste any more time going after these big name people for small charges (Edwards, Clemens, Bonds) and focus on more important matters like bringing charges against the people who precipitated the great recession.

And again was this case being brought up and tried ever worth it.. Just another case of wasting tax payer money. Why do they continue to think that we even care if Roger Clemmens took steroids or even lied to congress about it, its his own body and he didnt harm anybody. But Eric Holder of the DOJ can lie about anything he wants and a border patrol officer was killed and a family waits for answers! PATHETIC

Clemens got a break from Andy Pettitte, who did a complete 180 degree turn and expressed doubt that Clemens actually used banned substances. After the Mitchell report he was unequivocal about the steroid use. I think Andy lied on the witness stand.

Anyway I don't think the acquittal clears the path for Clemens into the Hall of Fame. While the prosecution's case fell apart and they couldn't prove the elements of the perjury beyond a reasonable doubt, there is substantial evidence that Clemens used banned substances.

Just heard that the defense rested in the Sandusky trial without calling Sandusky to the stand. If I had to make a wager, I'm guessing we'll have a verdict sooner rather than later.



TIS

Too bad he's not death penalty eligible.

And his wife! Her denials are almost as bad as his actions .

Police Chief in Trayvon Martin Shooting Fired

http://news.yahoo.com/trayvon-martin-cas...topstories.html

Zimmerman giving his account of things...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyPFANegwZ0&feature=player_embedded

The Arkansas Supreme Court Strikes Down Death Penalty

http://news.yahoo.com/arkansas-supreme-court-strikes-down-execution-law-141739246.html

(I wonder if the opinion was written in crayon)