...could you overlook this face? The defense in a murder trail in LA is having a problem selecting an impartial jury. I plead guilty. I couldn't be impartial.
JURY

That's a head that needs detached from its support system.

I would have no problem at all being impartial. Feelings don't have a damn thing to do with facts and evidence.

My Granddaddy believed he had the ability to tell if a person was a crook by the way his eyes "set" in his head......tend to frown on people whose eyes were "too close together". He should be around to get a load of that lunatic......probably would say he had "guilty" written all over his face.

You gotta admit that guy wouldn't score high on the credibility scale. And that would (IMHO) be a pretty safe assumption.

The all blue beezer is a nice touch, sort of a reversei Bozo nose. Punch here.

I could do it. I couldn't be impartial on him being an idiot doing that to himself but I could be impartial for the trial.

have the jurors wear those solar eclipse glasses

It depends on what the lawyers asked.

Could I honestly say that I can pass no prejudicial judgement on a man that did that to himself? No. The guy's a damn fool and has something seriously wrong in his head.

Could I be shown the facts of the case and render a not-guilty verdict? Yes. I don't believe any allegation against a man unless it can be proven beyond my doubts. I've been wrongly accused of things in the past--several times in fact. I nearly did not graduate high school, because of a wrongful accusation. You would need far more than a guilty look or a face full of tattoos to convince me the man had committed a crime.

I wonder if he’s ever had a job interview?

I bet that was interesting.

My advice don’t get a tattoo where a judge can see it.

Me to defense counsel: "I have no problem with the defendant's personal choices, it's a free country."

Me to the Devil: "I'll be sending him your way soonest."

And yet lawyers try to get juries to think about everything but the evidence.

Being up against a top notch lawyer in a civil case is not an easy row to hoe. Hired guns is what they are, first come, first served.

Since when is a picture of the defendant part of the jury selection process? I've only had jury duty once and we didn't see the defendant until the trial started. I'd vote guilty for anything this guy is charged with.

I'd call this sewing and reaping.
Do something to purposely make people "fear your person or mind" and you may be successful, but it was his choice so let those chips fall where they may.

Trying to force people to not use common scene so he can have a "fair trial" is one of many thousands of attempts by government to take 100% control over the people it is sworn to be a servant to.
Any society who protects it's criminals, traitors and fools is going to be overflowing with criminals traitors and fools.

Yep.




They can try all they want.

I don't think the tattoos are going to matter. The eyewitness testimony that he did it will probably be enough.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/louisiana-attorney-judge-tattoos-client-double-murder

I could over look it, right before I found him guilty. Wonder which latino gang he belongs to. I think the people who could honestly be impartial need a serious look as well.

How apropos

I'm amazed he survived getting arrested. Let's have a fair trial and a quick execution.
Jerry

The defendant was in the courtroom the two times I was called. One was a child molester, I was excused because my former BIL is a registered sex offender. The second was a threatening with a weapon. I was not picked but I don't know why.

"Bottoms faces a mandatory sentence of life in prison if found guilty, according to the news outlet."
There is no justice.

As usual sir, you are correct. It's not something I would do, because I just don't care that much about what others think, but some folks have bad acne issues, or burns, and feel that anything would be an improvement. Even if it just takes your attention away from how they really look.
Could I be impartial? I already am, and will await the evidence.

whoa
whoa
whoa.....hold up

His names is "Bottoms" ????


hahahahahahaha, he's really headed to Pound Me In The Ass Prison

Easier to do that than trying to understand how a 24 year old dude could have accidentally had anally raped a 12 year old girl.

I stood up and said that i could not see that happening.

They let me go home.

I never get picked for Jury Duty. I sold our local PD Chief and most of his officers their duty weapons back when I was in the Firearms Industry.

Here’s how It usually goes:

Defense Attorney: “Do you know any of the witnesses?”

Me: “Yep. The Police Officer”

Defense Attorney: “How Do you know him”

Me: “I sold him his duty weapon”

Defense Attorney: “You’re Dismissed”

On a jury with him as a defendant????

That's one guilty mofo as far as I'm concerned.
I wouldnt pay attention to anything in the arguments other than what I found interesting .
Rest of the time I would be daydreaming, thinking about guns and gun projects.
Scoping out any attractive women in the court.

Ect ect ect .

Too easy
Why burn brain cells about a POS like that.....


Then I would use my jury duty money for 7.62 x 39 ammo
And if the jury was sequestered I would max the fugg out my daily chow allowance from room service also.
And I would be rubbing one out in my hotel room thinking of any hot women that was in the court also.

One must focus solely on the evidence.

Admit, the guy would be an easy pick in a line-up.

Looks like his twin brother was shot and killed in MS while a warrant was being served. Given that and both of their extensive crimes over the years it would be tough to be impartial.

It would be rather hard to overlook.

BTW, this guy had the beginnings of a rather nice IRA or other financial investment before!

I wonder if they got matching face tattoos so folks couldn't tell them apart.

i know a guy who screwed up big with his facial tatts and did some time, one of the few I believe is rehabilitated.
I have no ink myself and never will, but after meeting the guy I know, with out facts and evidence I think I could be impartial.

The old adage of don't judge a book by its cover, and never judge a man by his family.

Seems like the majority of these guys have had no father or father figure in there life. It's sad, being a divorced father in a very biased system, my oldest boys know who there dad is
I might not retire before I die, but my oldest know there dad, and know that dad love is pure, and dad loves them no matter what, but dad stands for what is right. End of story.
Unfortunately, my oldest has developed an inherent mis-trust for woman, particularly their mother. During his mom's visitation it a kicking screaming affair, that no child should ever be a victim too. He dreads when he has to see his mom, and i feel so bad for him, he love his step mom (my wife) and his grandmothers (both sides) but is afraid of his mother.


Sorry for the rant just feeling really bad for a kid today.

That is information you are not supposed to have during the voir dire... actually, not until after the trial.

Pretty much locks a fellow into a minimum wage type career...

"Having jury duty" and actually being selected to sit on a jury isn't the same thing.
The jury is selected in the presence of everyone involved in the trial.

At best.
Or, just become “self employed “.

Isn't his appearance and demeanor part of the evidence, perhaps a small part, but evidence none the less? I would be suspicious of a potential juror who said, "Nope, doesn't matter to me in the least.

Yep, the prosecutor still needs to prove their case.

How'd you like for this guy to be serving you a burger at McDonald's?

Guilty

And many authorities and leaders claim they need "Red Flag" laws.....they aren't seriously after nutjobs advertising as nutjobs.

I was jury foreman for a murder trial where the defendant looked like a Boy Scout and we convicted him. So yeah, I can overlook appearances.

Tattoos mean nothing to me. Yeah, they are mostly stupid, We are all stupid at least once, sometimes the eyes tell you what’s there, sometimes not. I would lean to acquittal unless the facts were overwhelming against him. Beyond a reasonable doubt... Seen firsthand how the State manipulates evidence to get convictions. Have also seen officers lie to make it happen. Saw a local kid sit in jail for over a year because his phone was at a location where a biker rear ended a car. Biker had a gun in his hand while lying in the road, responding paramedics waited for troopers to arrive and disarm before checking status. No mention of the gun in the police report, kid sat in jail for all that time charged with 2nd degree murder because his phone was at the location and he would not identify the driver of the car. Sheriff told the mother, the boy was held because if it went to trial, the state pays the jail cost. If they let him go before trial, the county has to cover it. What a goatphuck...

Whatever my opinion of the defendant might be, in the forefront of my mind would be the knowledge that more than one injustice is done when an innocent person is convicted:
1. An innocent (at least of the charge at hand) person goes to jail
2. A guilty person goes free (and this one is a biggy for me)
3. Justice is not served for the victim or the victim's family

You might could rationalize #1 away if the defendant is a known criminal scumbag, and you thought he deserved to be put a way for something. But I don't see how you can get around #2 and #3.