08-07-2015, 12:10 PM
(08-06-2015, 08:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote:(08-06-2015, 03:32 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Straight up with no penalties to keepers, I'd keep Peterson and Charles, reasoning is that both of them have already had multiple top 5 finishes, Hill and Anderson are not there yet.
Can you try to trade Hill and Anderson?
fredtoast
It is not a common belief at all. Not one juror said they relied on nullification. Instead of talking about a lot of "maybes" lets look at what the jurors actually said
One juror said the panel was troubled by the prosecution's reliance on McNamee.
"The defense showed that McNamee was a liar and once that was done, nothing that he said could hold up," juror Joyce Robinson-Paul told the New York Daily News.
Joyce R-P, the juror you've quoted, is a political activist in Washington DC.
She also had this to say
"You have these cutthroat thieves, murderers, drug dealers and drug addicts and you decide to go after somebody who had a reputation for trying to do his best and be the best that he can be, and you attack him," Robinson-Paul told The News.
Sounds like she maybe had preconceived notions of a 'just' trial, no?
I think it's safe to presume nullification could have played a role in this case. Just google 'roger Clemons jury nullification' and see how many hits you get.
But this isn't about him. It's about the nullification and the fact that it is not illegal.
-That which we need most, will be found where we want to visit least.-
