Joyce A. Aros
BJ/ so the information that...
Tue Jan 31, 6:45

...would make that determination should have been crucial. Of course neither side would want to over-play their hand, but there still has to be some substance and preparation in order to attain the goal of a jury trial. It seems to me the Prosecution, especially, should have been more conscientious and motivated. I just don't see that here.

I think, based on your last comment, a jury trial meant only the Prosecution would present its case. Doesn't that seem odd, or am I up the creek without a paddle again? I think I read that in Lubet's book but can't find it that quick.

Always an interesting exercise!

  • Re: Still wondering about...B.J., Tue Jan 31 2:21
    Joyce, did you forget this was simply a hearing to determine if the defendants should be bound over for trial? A prosecution... more
    • BJ/ so the information that... — Joyce A. Aros, Tue Jan 31 6:45
      • Re: BJ/ so the information that...B.J., Wed Feb 01 0:22
        Joyce, I am curious if you actually understand the difference between a "jury trial" and the "Grand Jury" ordering a jury trial? The Grand Jury (then and now) only evaluates prosecution evidence and... more
        • BJ/ you bring up a good point...Joyce A. Aros, Wed Feb 01 6:34
          I probably do not recognize a difference in the two descriptions as you present them. Looks like I will have to do some worthwhile research. I really appreciate your drawing attention to what is... more