Current Events > Lone woman was holdout for 10 of the manafort counts that were dropped

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/23/politics/paul-manafort-juror-paula-duncan/index.html

He would have been convicted of all 18 but the lady kept insisting she had reasonable doubt

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/23/politics/paul-manafort-juror-paula-duncan/index.html
---

Probably a Trump-supporter.
---

Can't wait to see the dirt they dig up on her.

Solar_Crimson posted...

Probably a Trump-supporter.

She's proud of her MAGA hat.
---

So trump fan was the reason why he only got 8 out of the 18?
---

LightHawKnight posted...

So trump fan was the reason why he only got 8 out of the 18?

not clearly, no. the woman being interviewed was a trump supporter, who stated she voted guilty on all 18 counts. there was a SECOND woman, who simply sat there and said "I have a reasonable doubt" over and over, apparently with no basis for this statement.

"We all tried to convince her to look at the paper trail. We laid it out in front of her again and again and she still said that she had a reasonable doubt. And that's the way the jury worked. We didn't want it to be hung, so we tried for an extended period of time to convince her, but in the end she held out and that's why we have 10 counts that did not get a verdict," Duncan said on "Fox News at Night."

---

Oh my fuck, imagine if they find out this woman was a plant lmao

Juicy juicy juicy
---

The jury system is flawed. All it takes is for one biased or bribed or intimidated jury member to screw up the whole process.

Then again, I don't know what's a good alternative.
---

shockthemonkey posted...

You guys are gonna have to try harder to sell this as a conspiracy, sure doesnt seem like one considering the 8 guilty verdicts.

This is true. I wonder why she moved on 8 of them but not the other 10?
---

Not suspicious at all
---

Solar_Crimson posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

You guys are gonna have to try harder to sell this as a conspiracy, sure doesnt seem like one considering the 8 guilty verdicts.

This is true. I wonder why she moved on 8 of them but not the other 10?

looks worse if Trump pardons someone 100% guilty instead of guilty but maybe kinda not guilty at the same time
---

So she was an ignorant buffoon and refused to acknowledge facts that everybody else acknowledged? Sounds like MAGA justice! What you see and hear isnt the truth! Wear a hat and be my pawn!
---

Southernfatman posted...

The jury system is flawed. All it takes is for one biased or bribed or intimidated jury member to screw up the whole process.

Then again, I don't know what's a good alternative.

There are a couple states that don't require juries to be unanimous in most cases, only extreme ones.

Also the woman they were interviewing should've never been on the jury regardless of how she ended up voting.
---

Just so everyone is aware, the named lady, Paula Duncan, is not the person who didn't wish to convict Manafort, despite her being a Trump supporter.

Duncan, who is the first juror to speak publicly, offered a look behind the scenes of the deliberations. She noted that "crazily enough, there were even tears," and detailed some of the jury's conversations with the lone juror who she said was the reason Manafort was not found guilty on all counts.

"We all tried to convince her to look at the paper trail. We laid it out in front of her again and again and she still said that she had a reasonable doubt. And that's the way the jury worked. We didn't want it to be hung, so we tried for an extended period of time to convince her, but in the end she held out and that's why we have 10 counts that did not get a verdict," Duncan said on "Fox News at Night."

---

I haf reasonable doubt comrade.
---

Southernfatman posted...

The jury system is flawed. All it takes is for one biased or bribed or intimidated jury member to screw up the whole process.

Then again, I don't know what's a good alternative.

Judge Dredd.
---

They completely ignored Gates testimony and yet the rest of the jurors still decided Manafort was guilt based on the huge pool of evidence. But sure, you had a reasonable doubt. Even the MAGA woman thought he was guilty. No idea what was going on in that other womans head.
---

Alpha218 posted...

No idea what was going on in that other womans head.

late-stage tribalism.
---

Solar_Crimson posted...

a Trump-supporter.

---

shockthemonkey posted...

Eh, whatever. Thats how this is supposed to work. He can still be retried.

This is a reasonable response, and the only one I need. The rest of you can go.
---

Is bribing a juror really that unbelievable from a guy that literally threatened witnesses of his own trial?
---

hollow_shrine posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

Eh, whatever. Thats how this is supposed to work. He can still be retried.

This is a reasonable response, and the only one I need. The rest of you can go.

Why can he be retried?
---

Muffinz0rz posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

Eh, whatever. Thats how this is supposed to work. He can still be retried.

This is a reasonable response, and the only one I need. The rest of you can go.

Why can he be retried?

Because it's a hung jury, not acquittal

BWing posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

Eh, whatever. Thats how this is supposed to work. He can still be retried.

This is a reasonable response, and the only one I need. The rest of you can go.

Why can he be retried?

Because it's a hung jury, not acquittal

oh nice
---

BLAKUboy posted...

Is bribing a juror really that unbelievable from a guy that literally threatened witnesses of his own trial?

Manafort was already punished for witness tampering. Youd think they would be on the lookout for jury tampering as well
---

Darkman124 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

So trump fan was the reason why he only got 8 out of the 18?

not clearly, no. the woman being interviewed was a trump supporter, who stated she voted guilty on all 18 counts. there was a SECOND woman, who simply sat there and said "I have a reasonable doubt" over and over, apparently with no basis for this statement.

"We all tried to convince her to look at the paper trail. We laid it out in front of her again and again and she still said that she had a reasonable doubt. And that's the way the jury worked. We didn't want it to be hung, so we tried for an extended period of time to convince her, but in the end she held out and that's why we have 10 counts that did not get a verdict," Duncan said on "Fox News at Night."

Sounds like Russia
---

it's not like you're required to explain your position. you can reach your verdict in basically literally any way you determine. the jury could decide to wrassle for it if they wanted to and it would be legal
---

I wonder if she was simply trying to save manafort to do her duty as a trump supporter or if somebody paid her off. Either way it doesn't matter, he can be retiraled for those at a later date, dude is still looking at 80 years minimum for the other 8 charges, still has 2 more trails to go and unless Trump wants to sign his own death warrent pardoning him removes Manafort's ability to plead the fifth to any questioning by authorities.

What's even more absurd is that even with this Manafort refuses to cooperate what he knows to Mueller, it's like he's more frightened of the russians and their reaction to him turning over on Trump than spending the rest of his life in jail.

Imagine if Trump pardons him and to avoid his future court room dates he flees the country then turns up dead anyway under mysterious means.
---

tremain07 posted...

I wonder if she was simply trying to save manafort to do her duty as a trump supporter or if somebody paid her off.

Either way, she lied when she swore her juror's oath. She was told to make her judgment without prejudice or sympathy. Clearly, she's very prejudiced.
---

I feel like they would press charges immediately in other pending cases and put him under house arrest again knowing he is a flight risk
---

Minute posted...

tremain07 posted...

I wonder if she was simply trying to save manafort to do her duty as a trump supporter or if somebody paid her off.

Either way, she lied when she swore her juror's oath. She was told to make her judgment without prejudice or sympathy. Clearly, she's very prejudiced.

hence 'mistrial'

which allows them to try him again
---

Darkman124 posted...

hence 'mistrial'

which allows them to try him again

I mean, dude's already got 80 years in the slammer. He's mondo fucked for life, this is more about cracking him to get to the real prize.
---

Minute posted...

tremain07 posted...

I wonder if she was simply trying to save manafort to do her duty as a trump supporter or if somebody paid her off.

Either way, she lied when she swore her juror's oath. She was told to make her judgment without prejudice or sympathy. Clearly, she's very prejudiced.

she's very prejudiced because she had doubt on 10 of 18 counts? fuck that kind of logic imo
---

M_Live posted...

Darkman124 posted...

there was a SECOND woman, who simply sat there and said "I have a reasonable doubt" over and over, apparently with no basis for this statement.

That sounds really fishy honestly

It really isn't. Jurors sometimes find strange reasons for their vote. The prosecution could have a video of someone killing the victim, but if he has a nice smile they might not convict.

Is what it is.
---

Alpha218 posted...

I feel like they would press charges immediately in other pending cases and put him under house arrest again knowing he is a flight risk

He was on house arrest before this and he was STILL committing crimes, if they don't bolt him to this country the moment Trump's pen touches that pardon sheet he's gonna run to the wind to some place that doesn't have an extraction treaty with us.
---

Southernfatman posted...

The jury system is flawed. All it takes is for one biased or bribed or intimidated jury member to screw up the whole process.

Then again, I don't know what's a good alternative.

It should always be easier to acquit than convict.

NeoShadowhen posted...

Can't wait to see the dirt they dig up on her.

Sadly I think this will happen. CNN and Buzzfeed already threw a hissy fit that the judge blocked them from doxing the jurors. Its just a matter of time until jurors that dont think the correct way will be crucified by our glorious thought police lords at CNN.
---

Southernfatman posted...

The jury system is flawed. All it takes is for one biased or bribed or intimidated jury member to screw up the whole process.

Then again, I don't know what's a good alternative.

Strict intelligence testing. Smarter people use reason to come to conclusions rather than feelings.
---

Nomadic View posted...

NeoShadowhen posted...

Can't wait to see the dirt they dig up on her.

Sadly I think this will happen. CNN and Buzzfeed already threw a hissy fit that the judge blocked them from doxing the jurors. Its just a matter of time until jurors that dont think the correct way will be crucified by our glorious thought police lords at CNN.

No one was trying to dox anyone, its a regular practice for journalists to have the names of jurors. Stop being an idiot.

FursonaNonGrata posted...

Nomadic View posted...

NeoShadowhen posted...

Can't wait to see the dirt they dig up on her.

Sadly I think this will happen. CNN and Buzzfeed already threw a hissy fit that the judge blocked them from doxing the jurors. Its just a matter of time until jurors that dont think the correct way will be crucified by our glorious thought police lords at CNN.

No one was trying to dox anyone, its a regular practice for journalists to have the names of jurors. Stop being an idiot.

Don't automatically assume malice, especially after several of the OJ jurors made bank on media tours and book deals.

I feel like there's people that still don't understand that the woman being interviewed is not the same person who wouldn't budge on the 10 counts.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

FursonaNonGrata posted...

Nomadic View posted...

NeoShadowhen posted...

Can't wait to see the dirt they dig up on her.

Sadly I think this will happen. CNN and Buzzfeed already threw a hissy fit that the judge blocked them from doxing the jurors. Its just a matter of time until jurors that dont think the correct way will be crucified by our glorious thought police lords at CNN.

No one was trying to dox anyone, its a regular practice for journalists to have the names of jurors. Stop being an idiot.

Don't automatically assume malice, especially after several of the OJ jurors made bank on media tours and book deals.

Everyone's just basing their opinion on this on some article written by a strong right-leaning website. Like it literally cited the Bill Cosby case as if anyone who was on the Jury that was "outed" didn't out themselves.
---

I think it's weird that this person agreed with eight of them if she was so standoffish. Something like "Yeah, I agree he's guilty on these eight charges, but I'm going to just sit out on the other ten!"

It doesn't seem like conspiracy, and it also seems pointless to be difficult without explaining the "reasonable doubt" on the other charges.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

FursonaNonGrata posted...

Nomadic View posted...

NeoShadowhen posted...

Can't wait to see the dirt they dig up on her.

Sadly I think this will happen. CNN and Buzzfeed already threw a hissy fit that the judge blocked them from doxing the jurors. Its just a matter of time until jurors that dont think the correct way will be crucified by our glorious thought police lords at CNN.

No one was trying to dox anyone, its a regular practice for journalists to have the names of jurors.

Don't automatically assume malice, especially after several of the OJ jurors made bank on media tours and book deals.

Its CNN. Of course Im going to assume malice. Especially after they threatened to dox a guy with because he made a silly meme they didnt like. Luckily they showed mercy as his groveling was deemed appropriate by CNN.
---

Nomadic View posted...

Its CNN. Of course Im going to assume malice.

lol yikes
---