General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGhislaine Maxwell wants dismissal because not enough minorities were on Grand Jury panel
Link to tweet
Jacob Shamsian
@JayShams
·
Jan 26, 2021
Ghislaine Maxwell asked a judge to drop charges against her, arguing the grand jury pool didn't have enough Black or Hispanic people
Ghislaine Maxwell asked a judge to drop charges against her, arguing the grand jury pool didn't...
Lawyers for the Jeffrey Epstein associate say jurors who indicted her for sex trafficking underage girls may have not been diverse enough.
insider.com
Jacob Shamsian
@JayShams
Ghislaine's lawyers say that because the jurors were from White Plains instead of Manhattan, prosecutors violated her 6th Amendment rights https://insider.com/ghislaine-maxwell-asks-drop-charges-because-juror-pool-not-diverse-2021-1
Image
https://www.insider.com/ghislaine-maxwell-asks-drop-charges-because-juror-pool-not-diverse-2021-1
niyad
(113,370 posts)a rich, perverted white guy?? AM I reading this correctly?
Volaris
(10,272 posts)Shes saying that because the Grand Jury was assembled in White Plains instead of Manhattan (where her trial is supposed to be), the indictment itself needs thrown out because it didnt come from a 'jury of her (manhattan) peers'.
It's a bullshit argument that, at best, will buy her an extra 6 months in pretrial lockup until another grand jury in manhattan indicts her for exactly the same thing.
At least that's how I read the article...
cannabis_flower
(3,764 posts)Isnt Ghislaine a white girl? Isnt the whole point of having minorities on the jury that if you are a minority you want a jury of your peers? I could see if she said that there werent enough rich people or white people. But not enough minorities?
marble falls
(57,112 posts)RobinA
(9,894 posts)right out of my mouth. Creative lawyering.
Cirque du So-What
(25,949 posts)It's just a contrarian strategy of opposing every aspect of the trial - no matter how trivial.
Thunderbeast
(3,417 posts)...but it does shine a light on a huge problem in the criminal justice system.
One year ago, I spent a month serving on an all-white grand jury. We were "Jury A", which meant we reviewed the worst violent crimes in front of the District Attorney.
Of the seven:
Two were retired. Jury service had no impact on income.
Four worked for non-profit healthcare systems. Their pay was protected by their employer.
One worked for a large professional firm. His pay was also protected by his employer.
Overt racial bias did not seem present in jury selection, however, only people with secure employment in large institutions did not have the justifiable "hardship" claims that excused service.
The "hardship" filter was uncomfortable for all of us who did serve for a full month. It was hard work exposing us to very disturbing evidence. We viewed surveillance video evidence of three "in the act" homicides.
Many of the accused were racial minorities or lived in poverty. A jury of peers at the critical indictment phase is important, but the current system does not provide that protection. Jurors asked to serve weeks at a time must be compensated by employers or the state. We can not expect justice until this is fixed.
Gislane Maxwell's claim is ridiculous on it's face, but it does expose a real problem that should be addressed.
lettucebe
(2,336 posts)Seriously? It's supposed to be a jury of her peers, not a jury of her preference. And, for the record, it's rarely a jury of your actual peers since it's a jury made up by citizens of the jurisdiction where it is being tried.
panader0
(25,816 posts)Didn't she help Jeffery to procure Melania for donnie?
blitzen
(4,572 posts)Caliman73
(11,740 posts)I mean can't we get a jury of our actual peers... right?
no_hypocrisy
(46,130 posts)Use that Secret Pardon that your boy Trump gave you last week.