Earthnut Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 please do not use his name . thank you . Sorry, didn't use his name myself, was just quoting the article. Answers to the psychiatrist are sickening. https://news.yahoo.com/psychiatrist-childs-death-saddens-colorado-theater-shooter-170800641.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkabout Posted June 8, 2015 Author Share Posted June 8, 2015 https://kdvr.com/2015/06/05/aurora-theater-shooting-trial-moving-more-quickly-than-expected/ a good thing . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earthnut Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 https://kdvr.com/2015/06/05/aurora-theater-shooting-trial-moving-more-quickly-than-expected/ a good thing . The outrage would be too great if the nameless person didn't get at least life without parole. Death is questionable because of the issue ~ mental illness vs insanity. In a courtroom there is no justice, only the law. The victims and their families deserve justice, and will get it, one way or another, either now, or later. He could be killed in prison, or any facility they put him in for that matter, because of what he did, and all that he has said. Plus there would be no concern of his mental state, then, now, or anytime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elders (Moderators) Libby Posted June 8, 2015 Elders (Moderators) Share Posted June 8, 2015 That's very encouraging, Randee. I think there is a subtle, fine line between law and justice. The law states what is and what is not permissible, and what sentence is appropriate. Justice would be that he suffers for the rest of his life. Given his age, he could spend 50+ years being incarcerated, though I realise that still wouldn't be enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkabout Posted June 9, 2015 Author Share Posted June 9, 2015 All hell broke loose at the trial this morning. Three jurors have been dismissed and the trial was halted all morning as this is being sorted out. A juror let the judge know that there was information that needed to be brought to his attention as per his repeated instructions. The juror told the judge during a break last week that another juror received a phone call from her husband about one of the lawyers tweeting during the trial. Her phone was on speaker and that two other jurors heard it. There was also talk of a mistrial. All of this had been discussed with the jury OUT of the court room. Each of the three jurors were questioned [one at a time] by the judge in front of the defense, the prosecution , defendant and the audience including those on the internet . The juror who brought this to the judge’s attention was NOT released. The three were dismissed because they failed to bring this information to the judge’s attention as they were told over and over again that if ANY information about the trial was brought to them from an outside source needed to be brought to his attention immediately. The trial has resumed this afternoon with the testimony of one of the Psychiatrists [Dr Metzner] who had be testifying at the end of Monday. The jurors were first told to have no contact what so ever with the three who had been dismissed and they were NOT to speculate or infer anything by their dismissal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earthnut Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 All hell broke loose at the trial this morning. Three jurors have been dismissed and the trial was halted all morning as this is being sorted out. A juror let the judge know that there was information that needed to be brought to his attention as per his repeated instructions. The juror told the judge during a break last week that another juror received a phone call from her husband about one of the lawyers tweeting during the trial. Her phone was on speaker and that two other jurors heard it. There was also talk of a mistrial. All of this had been discussed with the jury OUT of the court room. Each of the three jurors were questioned [one at a time] by the judge in front of the defense, the prosecution , defendant and the audience including those on the internet . The juror who brought this to the judge’s attention was NOT released. The three were dismissed because they failed to bring this information to the judge’s attention as they were told over and over again that if ANY information about the trial was brought to them from an outside source needed to be brought to his attention immediately. The trial has resumed this afternoon with the testimony of one of the Psychiatrists [Dr Metzner] who had be testifying at the end of Monday. The jurors were first told to have no contact what so ever with the three who had been dismissed and they were NOT to speculate or infer anything by their dismissal. Wow, wow, wow, what a mess. So have the jurors that were dismissed been replaced, or are they proceeding with 3 less jurors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elders (Moderators) Libby Posted June 11, 2015 Elders (Moderators) Share Posted June 11, 2015 What on earth has happened to commonsense? Those jurors, and the husband, and especially that lawyer, should all have known that they needed to be 100% circumspect in their behaviour. Thank goodness the judge seems to have controlled the situation enough to avert a re-trial - that's not something that the victims and their families need. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkabout Posted June 15, 2015 Author Share Posted June 15, 2015 a 4th juror has been dismissed. This still leaves 20 jurors so the trial continues. The 4th juror was released because her brother in law had been shot last Wednesday during a robbery. The judge questioned the juror on Thursday and she claimed she would still be impartial and judge said he would take it under advisement. After the 3 day break , the judge Monday morning decided the juror was not credible and would not be able to remain impartial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elders (Moderators) Libby Posted June 15, 2015 Elders (Moderators) Share Posted June 15, 2015 That does sound sensible. Although many people can maintain their impartiality despite events that occur in their personal lives, this is a trial that needs very careful handling to forestall a mistrial. It seems this particular judge is being very careful. The extra jurors is a very good idea, and one which I think we could do with in the UK for major trials. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earthnut Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Dismissing the juror was for the best to me. She would be too stressed out and emotional after her brother-in-law being shot, and may not think straight to be impartial. I am so thankful the judge is being so careful. Extra jurors is an excellent idea. You never know from one day to the next what will happen, and always best to be on the safe side. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now