• NoSuchAgency@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    Historically, most successful appeals were the result of overlooked errors in jury instructions – often these errors were verbose instructions that confused jurors. For an appeal to be successful, the jury instructions have to be read as a whole and found to contain errors that were not harmless, but rather which ultimately made for an unfair trial. —Cornell Law School

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Guess what has not been done yet? A successful appeal.

      Here’s your source, BTW since you failed to actually link it:

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/jury_instructions

      It goes on to say:

      Appeals due to errors in jury instruction have been greatly reduced by the implementation of model, standard, or pattern instructions for specific jurisdictions.

      The instructions given to the jury were clear and standard. They were unanimous in their decision. So keep grasping at straws.

      • NoSuchAgency@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Standard? Right…keep telling yourself that. And if you really knew much about law, you’d know that a successful appeal can’t happen that fast. The process has been started though, and they’ve already delayed his sentencing, so we’ll see

        • SeaJ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          He used the standard for instruction. You can delude yourself into thinking he did not but all it will be is a delusion.