Judge declared a mistrail. The trial is over because the jury could not make up their mind if he was guilty or innocent. So now, the prosecution has to decide if they are going to try him again...probably this time for a lesser charge like manslaughter...
Yes... 3 got dropped. They gave a list of the reasons after closing arguments as to why a juror is replaced. I can't remember them all but 1 was if they get caught discussing the case or pulling up the case online.
The court did not say but there can be any number of reasons. Usually the juror was caught doing something specifically prohibited such as discussing the case outside the courtroom, lying on their voir dire forms or they just may fall ill.
He said they can find him guilty or innocent on any or all of the charges. So hes basically maiking it so they have to return all 3 guilty or all 3 not. What a farce of a judge.
@@user-of9qq6op5u Yes, judges get to do that. And they do not have to make a motion that is the job of the defense and prosecution attorneys. What law school did you go to?
@@user-fz6qv4ve8v You can't even read your own language. That the judge wasn't supposed to make a motion is the whole point. He DID make a motion. Go to the end of the state's final closing arguments. The judge is yelling "move to strike" like he never even heard of his job before.
@@user-fz6qv4ve8v If you followed the trial, you know Meade shot a man in the back who wasn't even aware of his presence. And this is your stance? And you're judging people who want to see him held accountable? True Cuck.
Courage, guys. The screen door was closed. He was out of hands. He had music playing. No witnesses supported he waved his gun. And Meade was caught lying when he didn't know there was footage. You KNOW what happened. You have NO reasonable doubt. Don't let anyone bully you into accepting one.
He radioed that Goodson had a gun with an extended magazine at the intersection when he first saw Goodson. So, let me get this right. He was headed to lunch, saw a young man in a car making a turn and decided to turn around and murder him for sport? After 17 years of service with the police. It just doesn’t make sense.
@@Dawgpound205 Meade was returning from a failed attempt to locate an actual suspect. He left his house looking forward to - and if you don't believe he was looking for to it, check his "sermons" - kneeling on someone's neck. Those hopes dashed, he keyed in on someone else, yes. This falls directly in line with the mentality of these types of cops. They get keyed up, someone is helping them come down.
@@Dawgpound205That is false. He never described the "gun" that he "saw" at the intersection. If that were the case, it would have been entered into evidence.
What the heck is that system of justice???? They asked them three question which is YES or NO. Question number one, murder No. Question number two, second degree muder, No. Question number three, reckless behaviour with a firearm, Yes. So????????? He is guilty of something????? But you have to write eithe Yes at all the questions or either No at all the questions???? Why asking three questions then????? In other cases, you have Muder one, Murder two, or not guilty. Only one answer is good. You can't answer yes at those three questions... Murder One yes, Murder Two yes, Not guilty yes... Somebody will explain me Ohio rules and twist of laws but... We ALL know he is guilty a s sin!!!!!
I share your confusion, because what you're referring to is the practice of offering "lesser/included" offenses that the jury can return in lieu of the greater offense, but these each require their own verdict, so they would appear to be lesser by happenstance, but not lesser/included. But then the judge blocked them from returning justified for one and not for all, which would seem to tie them back together. So yeah, IDK and I just wasted your time.
Don't rejoice too soon. Maybe the jury instructions will be clearer next time and if they bring federal charges.... The jury WANTED to say guilty on one count but i don't understand the complex part why it was refused. Don't celebrate too soon bootlicker. He has an history of police brutality and you still idolizing him. This is NOT a case when a cop kills a bad black and good riddance. That poor guy was CLEAN as Baby Jesus! And maybe on the next trial, they will be able to talk about his bad behaviours in the past...@@user-fz6qv4ve8v
Prosecution didn't prove that Casey didn't point his gun at Officer Jason Meade. This leaves reasonable doubt concerning guilt. This may be what the jury is struggling with. Therefore a not guilty verdict is the reasonable and non-biased verdict.
You may have missed the part where an expert forensic scientist said the screen door was closed, which means there was no room for Casey to extend his arm behind him - should he for some reason want to extend his third arm directly behind him to aim at an officer, while holding sandwiches in his left hand and opening the inner door with right. You're expressing a speculative, imaginary doubt, which is expressly ruled out in the jurors' instructions.
I would hope so but you don;t know who is on the jury. You could have one of those BLM terrorists on there like in the Chauvin trial. They did kick two of the jurors out and I would love to know why. But a mistrial is still pretty good.
@@user-of9qq6op5u "You may have missed the part where an expert forensic scientist said the screen door was closed" -Actually on trial day 3, even the prosecution's witness, FBI agent Aimee Qulia who is a Physical Scientist Forensic Examiner in The Firearms and Toolmarks Unit says the screen door couldn't have been shut. I included the RU-vid video link of her statement at the correct timestamp for you to see. 🙂 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aR96E1CU8Wk.htmlt
@@veganlogic4empathy Clown. You included the link of her testimony, where in she said no such thing. In fact, she submitted a report to investigators stating the screen door was, in fact, closed.
He’s innocent. I look at the fact that he said he seen a gun and then the kid had a gun. Now if a gun wasn’t found it would be different. Kid should have followed directions and he’d still be around. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
