Let's assume this trial ends in a mistrial, like the trial before it did.
Well then SDFLA readers, should the government retry the case for a third time?
Don't two mistrials demonstrate that the government has a proof problem? [edited to get rid of the double negatives referenced in the comments]. When do we reach that point? After 5 hung juries? 10? I think 2 is the number....
What about bond? If there is a mistrial, and the government decides to proceed a third time, certainly the remaining six should receive bond. Pretrial detention for defendants who haven't been convicted after two trials can't be right.
The court appointed lawyers must be sweating. One of these long CJA trials is enough to cripple a practice, but two back-to-back is almost impossible to come back from. If a third trial were to start up right away, I'm not sure how these lawyers could keep their private practices up and running...
I also feel terrible for the prosecutors trying the case. Their lives have been turned upside by the many months in back-to-back trials. And the decision to retry the case isn't theirs. The decision most likely isn't even being made here in Miami. It probably is being made by some lawyer in DC who won't have to endure 3 trials.
My prediction is that despite all of the above, if there is a hung jury, the case will be tried a third time.
The SDFLA Blog is dedicated to providing news and notes regarding federal practice in the Southern District of Florida. The New Times calls the blog "the definitive source on South Florida's federal court system." All tips on court happenings are welcome and will remain anonymous. Please email David Markus at dmarkus@markuslaw.com
and a 4th time and a 5th time and a 6th time.
ReplyDeleteDon't try to inject perspective in to any thoughts the government may have.
You shouldn't feel sorry for the government attorneys. They chose to proceed with the case. If they didn't believe in it, then they could step aside and refuse to go forward. Don't confuse doing the right thing with doing the right thing for ones career - they are very different concepts.
ReplyDeleteFinally, what isn't up with the no double negatives in the first third sentence?
I think if Judge Lenard sets the new trial date after Acosta steps down - the case quietly will go away.
ReplyDeleteYeah, sorry about the double negatives. Very poorly written. That's what happens when you write a post on Sunday night.
ReplyDeleteDon't listen to that Jerk, David.
ReplyDeleteDidn't Churchill famously say "We shall try them on land...we shall try them on (miami) beaches...we shall try them in the keys...we shall NEVER dismiss the charges"?
ReplyDeleteOr was that John Ashcroft?
I get confused sometimes.
As for double negatives... "never never surrender.!!!"