1. Hung jury is what will happen; and

2. I assume most wealthy White people wouldn't go to prison if convicted of a crime like this (unless your name is Martha Stewart), so tRump won't be going.

*Hung jury is the best they will do against him on any of his criminal prosecutions. Based on how he looks and acts at the counsel table, Mother Nature will be administering the death penalty soon enough.

bearister said:

---

1. Hung jury is what will happen; and

2. I assume most wealthy White people wouldn't go to prison if convicted of a crime like this (unless your name is Martha Stewart), so tRump won't be going.

*Hung jury is the best they will do against him on any of his criminal prosecutions. Based on how he looks and acts at the counsel table, Mother Nature will be administering the death penalty soon enough.

---

bearister: There is almost no other attorney I would want as my defense counsel (admittedly because I know you would do it pro bono for a fellow Bear ), but for one of the few times I can recollect, I will respectfully disagree with one of your points.

1. Trump will be found guilty, but of course (and unfortunately) he will never serve a second in a cell.

2. As always, you know the loser of this bet has to pay the winner either a Top Dog or Mendoza Burrito ....

Edit: If I may, you will also owe me a "Giant Burger" on the Northside (if it's still there) when Trump loses in November ....

You know this is all in good humor because I will buy the Top Dogs, Mendozas, or Giant Burgers, win or lose.

I always liked the Giant Burger on Northside. However, I still remember the night the burger chef couldn't remember if my roommates and I had paid when we ordered. We had. The whole time we were eating our burgers, he was *****ing about how we were ripping him off and getting the burgers for free. So, as we left, we chipped in and punched up Donny Osmond on the jukebox singing Puppy Love 12 times in a row.

The next time we were in there, he apologized. The money in the till at the end of the night was right, so he knew we had paid. He also begged us to never do that on the jukebox again because he couldn't shut it off or silence it.

OsoDorado said:

---

No, it's not because I hate Donald J. Trump. It's because despite my hatred of him, I could put it aside to judge the case only on the evidence.

Instead, he wants people who don't care about the facts (which are so obviously incriminating), but rather want to just "O.J." this case (to coin a term).

I just hope justice is ultimately done. "Guilty as sin, and as charged !!" See you in an Orange Jumpsuit, you pig .... !"

---

Absolutely. His worse nightmare is being held to the same standards as people who are beneath him.

When he's awake during the trial, he probably mutters about how Putin, Kim and Xi would never have to deal with the consequences of their actions.

I think he is really just focused on finding one, dumb, old, white guy who believes his nonsense because that's all it takes. Of course it could be a crazy person who isn't in the former category, but trying to find one of them is far riskier than just playing the demographics game.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

I think he is really just focused on finding one, dumb, old, white guy who believes his nonsense because that's all it takes. Of course it could be a crazy person who isn't in the former category, but trying to find one of them is far riskier than just playing the demographics game.

---

Except, the reason I bet bearister that Trump would ultimately be found guilty is that the I believe the jury will unanimously agree that Trump is a criminal

If I am wrong, now I'm going to have to up the ante: Chinatown dim sum or Mission Burritos on me if I'm wrong.

I'll have to eat 6 Germans to better my PB set in Spring Quarter, 1975.

OsoDorado said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

I think he is really just focused on finding one, dumb, old, white guy who believes his nonsense because that's all it takes. Of course it could be a crazy person who isn't in the former category, but trying to find one of them is far riskier than just playing the demographics game.

---

Except, the reason I bet bearister that Trump would ultimately be found guilty is that the I believe the jury will unanimously agree that Trump is a criminal

If I am wrong, now I'm going to have to up the ante: Chinatown dim sum or Mission Burritos on me if I'm wrong.

---

I don't think Trump spends even an hour in jail in this lifetime. Even if he's convicted, he'll end up with meaningless probation. Maybe at some point he will get some kind of bespoke house arrest type arrangement because I don;t think that we can possibly have someone with secret service protection residing in a prison.

But I don't think he'll be convicted even if the state (or feds) are able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt he's guilty of crimes, because it only takes one nutjob and we have a country with a lot of them. It's not a random sampling of his "peers" either, he's going to use his challenges and peremptories in order to increase the chances of a nutjob on the jury.

Leaving lawyers on a jury (2 in this case) is an unconventional and risky play. I've only seen it backfire. I co-tried a wrongful termination case in the early 1990's for a plaintiff and the defense inexplicably left a woman attorney from Berkeley on the jury. She ended up as foreman. Punitive damages and emotional distress were not available, strictly contract damages(lost wages).

Our client had agreed to settle for two years lost wages. Defendant told us to F off. Jury awarded 20 years lost wages based on our theory defendant effectively blackballed our client in the industry, and that she would never find reasonably comparable employment in the industry for the next 20 years she intended to work. Judgment was paid in full.

Takeaway: Never leave a lawyer on a jury unless you feel the odds are great they will be sympathetic to your client's case. We felt that way about the Berkeley female attorney. The defense firm got stiffed on a large part of its fee and sued for malpractice aka "The Double Whammy" (not related to the jury selection they f@ucked up).

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

I always liked the Giant Burger on Northside. However, I still remember the night the burger chef couldn't remember if my roommates and I had paid when we ordered. We had. The whole time we were eating our burgers, he was *****ing about how we were ripping him off and getting the burgers for free. So, as we left, we chipped in and punched up Donny Osmond on the jukebox singing Puppy Love 12 times in a row.

The next time we were in there, he apologized. The money in the till at the end of the night was right, so he knew we had paid. He also begged us to never do that on the jukebox again because he couldn't shut it off or silence it.

---

Haha. Great story.

bearister said:

---

Leaving lawyers on a jury (2 in this case) is an unconventional and risky play. I've only seen it backfire. I co-tried a wrongful termination case in the early 1990's for a plaintiff and the defense inexplicably left a woman attorney from Berkeley on the jury. She ended up as foreman. Punitive damages and emotional distress were not available, strictly contract damages(lost wages).

Our client had agreed to settle for two years lost wages. Defendant told us to F off. Jury awarded 20 years lost wages based on our theory defendant effectively blackballed our client in the industry, and that she would never find reasonably comparable employment in the industry for the next 20 years she intended to work. Judgment was paid in full.

Takeaway: Never leave a lawyer on a jury unless you feel the odds are great they will be sympathetic to your client's case. We felt that way about the Berkeley female attorney. The defense firm got stiffed on a large part of its fee and sued for malpractice aka "The Double Whammy" (not related to the jury selection they f@ucked up).

---

They did that because they know that the lawyers will trigger the one nutjob MAGAt they manage to stumble into in the jury pool that manages to evade detection. They only need 1 person to spoil the prosecution and it won't be one of the lawyers.

I'm sorry, I know you guys are salivating over Trump being found guilty but there's not even an appearance of impartiality in this latest trial lol.

The seven jurors seated in Trump’s trial

Their media consumption includes Google, The New York Times, MSNBC, WaPo and The Breakfast Club

The Wall Street Journal is the furthest right news source in this entire list

Unbelievable pic.twitter.com/bJOSAFwSeh

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) April 17, 2024

Juror #5 getting their news from Tik Tok and The Breakfast Club lol.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

I'm sorry, I know you guys are salivating over Trump being found guilty but there's not even an appearance of impartiality in this latest trial lol.

The seven jurors seated in Trump’s trial

Their media consumption includes Google, The New York Times, MSNBC, WaPo and The Breakfast Club

The Wall Street Journal is the furthest right news source in this entire list

Unbelievable pic.twitter.com/bJOSAFwSeh

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) April 17, 2024

Juror #5 getting their news from Tik Tok and The Breakfast Club lol.

---

Disclaimer: Nobody can be voted a Foreperson until the entire Jury is set, the entire case is heard, and they go into the back room and are to come up with a unanimous verdict one way or another. Therefore, everything written in this post is subject to LYING.

Actual question for an actual lawyer to answer: Does the fact that they 7 people have been "seated" mean that BOTH SIDES have NOT used one of their 10 "you're out"s? I understand they can each knock off max of 10.

Can they get to 12 plus 6 in reserve (=18) and THEN start using their OUTS ?

OsoDorado said:

---

bearister said:

---

1. Hung jury is what will happen; and

2. I assume most wealthy White people wouldn't go to prison if convicted of a crime like this (unless your name is Martha Stewart), so tRump won't be going.

*Hung jury is the best they will do against him on any of his criminal prosecutions. Based on how he looks and acts at the counsel table, Mother Nature will be administering the death penalty soon enough.

---

bearister: There is almost no other attorney I would want as my defense counsel (admittedly because I know you would do it pro bono for a fellow Bear ), but for one of the few times I can recollect, I will respectfully disagree with one of your points.

1. Trump will be found guilty, but of course (and unfortunately) he will never serve a second in a cell.

2. As always, you know the loser of this bet has to pay the winner either a Top Dog or Mendoza Burrito ....

Edit: If I may, you will also owe me a "Giant Burger" on the Northside (if it's still there) when Trump loses in November ....

You know this is all in good humor because I will buy the Top Dogs, Mendozas, or Giant Burgers, win or lose.

---

Oscar's on the corner of Hearst and Shattuck was the best burger option in the neighborhood, charcoal grilled burgers. It's been replaced by a health food chain store.