Meanwhile back in Kangaroo Court, the Trump Jury had requests in two notes to the Judge after they started their deliberations. In their first note they asked to rehear portions of testimony of an alleged meeting between David Pecker, of the National Enquirer, Michael Cohen and Donald Trump at Trump Tower. In the second note they requested that the Judge reread the Jury Instructions. (In Illinois the instructions go back to the Jury room, although I have always doubted how much jurors read, or understand, those poorly drafted and confusing testaments to the ability of attorneys to make the English language almost entirely opaque.)
In my experience such Jury requests to the Court usually, but not always, indicate a division among the jurors. We shall see.
The mere request for these things would seem to indicate a desire to actually deliberate.
That’s got to have the kangaroo rustlers confused and, if their hubris allows, concerned.
Scott Adams today opined (on his paywalled podcast, “Coffee With Scott Adams”), based on what’s been published about the jurors and their responses in the jury selection questioning process (“voir dire” in lawyer talk), that there are two who are likely to be, if not actually pro-Trump, then at least willing to consider the actual evidence. One is an investment banker, the other a “security engineer”, both of whom claim to get their news from a variety of sources, and profess to be neutral about Trump himself. He sees both as likely candidates to hang the jury, and I tend to agree. I expect the jury will not wait into the weekend to announce if they are deadlocked, as they aren’t likely to relish the idea of being sequestered until Monday. Pass the popcorn.