.

Prosecution altered the video? Lol

Mistrial time, free Kyle!

I think it's more that they produced a compressed version -- but the allegation is that the prosecution had a clearer and better version than the defense and deliberately withheld the better version because it allegedly helps Kyle. Discovery problems like this are almost never grounds for a mistrial.

Interesting issue here, though: the jury has asked to rewatch video, and if the video that the defense is complaining about is one of the ones the jury wants to watch --- well, that becomes a more important issue.

While perhaps an interesting academic exercise, trying to guess how the Founding Fathers would have viewed the modern world strikes me as (i) fraught with error; and (ii) a poor way to set policy.

What Canada did and most of the gun owners I know hated but once complete actually really liked, was requiring a gun safe of some form (and a few exceptions such as the gun being inoperable) and with the ammo being separately stored also in some form of locked cabinet.

If you are the type of person who sleeps with your gun under your pillow or at bedside each night thinking you are one sleep away from a shoot out you may not comply with the law but I think once most have that set up, they use it.

Crimes of passion, a big percent (suicides and familial murders) usually are best defused just by forcing time and some coherent thought in to the process. Just forcing some people to walk typically to a bedroom where the gun is in the safe, and to open it and then walk to the cabinet the bullets are in and unlock it, and then load can often be the time to snap someone out of a blind rage.

(I am not a gun owner so my exact understand may be slightly off and I am not in the mood to search specifics so take it as you will)

You should see where he got his screen name from.

+1. Founding fathers would view much of what we do as magic.

fascists ghana fascist

Isn't what you described one of the philosophies for judicial interpretation of the constitution?

At the most general level, that's textualism

Why do I think you just youtube'd your entire collection to humble brag to us that you got the complete set??

Gonna be amazing if they call for a mistrial because of the logarithms.

The jurors would be relieved. They really don't want to return a verdict in this spot. During voir dire, one potential juror said "I've always wanted to serve on a jury. I don't want to serve on this jury". Another said she might not be able to go home to her husband if they return the wrong verdict (I suspect I know which one would be the wrong one based on that context alone). I expect they all feel similarly.

I can't be the only guy who collects Play-Big 2000 capitol rioter action figures.

Just noticed I missed this.

This 10 minute video addresses that way better than I can.

The live stream is back on. I think they are arguing the motion to dismiss (if that is what it is).

ETA: defence are asking for a mistrial without prejudice.

I wouldn't set policy by it. I'm just amused that people who would don't ever consider this issue.

Hearing's finished. Seemed like mostly a nothingburger to my lay understanding.

Should have been a mistrial w prejudice! Justice for Kyle!!

Somebody punch him out please.

whoever that ism, would be easily the best poster maybe on this site

Kind words, thanks bro.

Admitting you're being coerced to return a certain verdict seems like another grounds for a mistrial.

But odds are a not guilty verdict based on self defense is warranted so she won't get a beating over that one.