The prosecution couldn’t convince one juror of their credibility, and frankly, I think the problem was with the FBI informant who was playing the role of an al Qaeda agent. A juror could reasonably believe that this entire plot was the idea of the FBI, and not the Haitians.
They went in too soon to really prove their case. They really needed to see some action, some affirmative sign that the Haitians were ready to act in furtherance of a plan.
This is going to be a gigantic waste of money and resources unless the prosecutors can really come up with a super defense of what happened. The judge is also going to be required to explain the decision.
]]>This sort of nonsense explains the lack of faith that many Americans, especially people of color, have in our supposedly even-handed system of jurisprudence. Half a century ago, “Twelve Angry Men” explored this very “faithless jury member” issue and delivered an answer that made all sorts of sense back in a better day when we believed in the system but that apparently doesn’t have any resonance anymore…
The next Gallup poll should explore the political leanings of people who have decided to start flocking to sporting goods stores to buy lifetime supplies of ammunition. The results might be interesting…
]]>