MatthewHSE - 5:50 am on Dec 23, 2010 (gmt 0) [edited by: lawman at 7:00 am (utc) on Dec 23, 2010]
Bias against crime is necessary for a juror, which is the only bias I have in this case. I would contend that people with no regard for law and order, which is the position you seem to espouse, are actually the dangerous ones to have on a jury.
Wow, you aren't biased at all! Hopefully you will never be in a jury, anywhere.
No, and I've said enough about Assange publicly to disqualify myself from ever being on a jury trying him for anything. I just meant that if I were qualified, and had the opportunity to sit on a jury trying Assange as a terrorist/extortionist, I'd gladly vote "guilty" if the evidence presented was anything like what I've read in the news.
How exactly would you get pas jury selection - lie?
The same way a single (bought/threatened?) jury member was able to hang the Blagojevich trial, despite his clear guilt - just hold out against the majority. Sure, Blago is going back to trial, and so would Assange, but I would never cast my vote to clear the man. He's clearly engaging in cyber terrorism and is trying to blackmail the government to boot.
How exactly would you hang a jury that was about to let him go?
[edited by: lawman at 7:00 am (utc) on Dec 23, 2010]