• 106 Posts
  • 5.94K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: March 3rd, 2024

help-circle




  • Ideally, a jury’s responsibility is to weigh the evidence and find whether the evidence supports a guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt.

    There has been no jury selection yet, let alone presentation of evidence. I would guess that any jury nullification would depend on a defense tactic of “Yes, my client committed this act, and his motive was to prevent UHC from directly causing the deaths of their customers by refusing to honor legitimate claims or by delaying payment of claims.” There might be something there, especially since UHC changed its stance on something (I forget exactly what right now) in the wake of their CEO being killed.

    But that would be a really difficult defense to mount. You’d basically be admitting to the act and hoping that at least one person on the jury would A) agree with your defense, and B) be willing to hold out over it, and C) not be replaced by an alternate for “failure to follow jury instructions” or some such thing.

    Again, since a jury has not even been selected, I won’t speculate on what evidence gets presented and what evidence (if any) ends up being excluded. By extension, I cannot agree with your above comment.

    Please note that I am also not saying “He’s guilty, he should hang”, because that would also entail speculating on evidence.






  • Solidarity aside, whenever you are arraigned, any lawyer worth their salt will advise you to plead not guilty, because entering a guilty plea means it’s over, move on to sentencing, where you have no leverage at all.

    You can always change a not guilty plea to a guilty plea later, if a plea deal offered by the prosecution is acceptable to you. This is especially relevant in a case where the death penalty is on the table, but also applies to the possibility of reduced charges or penalties in any case.

    I’ll also add that this case could well end up with an Alford plea. In short, where the defendant asserts innocence, does not admit to the criminal act, but accepts the sentence because they believe that a jury would find them guilty based on the evidence. Again, this is definitely related to a case where the death penalty is on the table.