"Marshall Hennington, the founder of New York-based trial and jury consultancy Hennington & Associates and a clinical psychologist, said he was not so much surprised at the jury being deadlocked twice as at the judge sending them to continue their discussions after they had already been deliberating for an unusually long time. He said the judge was “teetering on the brink of coercion” by ordering the jury to deliberate for a third time after so many days. “Does the judge respect their decision? There are some legal issues here and the judge runs the risk of being seen as biased. If they do not have enough evidence to decide beyond reasonable doubt then he may be considered to be forcing their hand,” said Hennington. But he pointed out that ruling a case a mistrial is tantamount to saying the jurors did not fulfill their obligation to make a decision one way or the other."
Three good bills in CrimJur committee Monday
1 hour ago