This is a genuine question.

I have a hard time with this. My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence, but my pessimistic side thinks this might have set a great example for CEOs to always maintain a level of humanity or face unforseen consequences.

P.S. this topic is highly controversial and I want actual opinions so let’s be civil.

And if you’re a mod, delete this if the post is inappropriate or if it gets too heated.

  • Itsamelemmy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    22 days ago

    Twelve. Pretty sure one can hang the jury. In that case they’d probably retry him. All 12 would have to agree to aquit.

    • xapr [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      21 days ago

      Correct. Jury trials in the US need unanimity from the 12 jurors to either establish guilt or innocence. Anything other than unanimity is a hung jury. Source: I’ve been a member of two juries that went to trial and reached unanimity. Also, be aware that a single juror holding out against the other jurors will go through intense pressure to adopt the prevailing opinion. The other jurors will be pissed that that one person is prolonging the process by days, especially when the judge keeps sending them back to keep deliberating and hopefully reach a unanimous decision. Jury nullification should not be taken lightly as it’s not a walk in the park.