Meantime, in SDNY, the district judge is really hurting the defense in the Diddy trial. The latest ruling was dumping an African-American juror over strenuous defense objection. Via TMZ:
Friday, Diddy's attorney Xavier Donaldson stood up and said the court was taking a big step backward by getting rid of a juror of color ... asking the judge to bring him back into the court to give him the chance to explain.And shortly after that juror was dismissed, another juror ended up in the hot seat, according to TMZ:
During the jury selection phase, Juror No. 6 revealed he was a 41-year-old Black Hispanic man who works for the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision. One of the main reasons the defense said they didn't want him dismissed is because he's one of the few Black jurors.
Diddy's trial is on the verge of another jury shakeup due to one of them getting a strange text message that's left the judge with concerns this juror is talking about the case outside of court.
Sources with direct knowledge tell TMZ the juror alerted the court on Friday about the text message, from a phone number he didn't recognize, asking him if HE was Juror No. 6 -- who'd already been in the news as someone Judge Arun Subramanian might dismiss.
We're told this other juror wanted the judge to know about the mystery text and, indeed, Judge Subramanian did have lots of questions for him about the message and the phone number from which it came.
Our sources say, although the juror said he didn't recognize the phone number ... the judge has concerns he might be discussing the trial with people who are NOT on the jury -- which, obviously, would be a major violation of the judge's instructions.
The judge is probably right to dismiss the juror under the circumstances because the perception of impropriety is potentially enough to derail the trial but it couldn't hurt to allow the juror to explain the situation before doing so. Diddy's lawyer is also right to be upset (and smart to preserve the issue in any event), but at its core it feels like he's implying the entitlement to a jury of peers means an entitlement to a certain racial makeup of the jury which can't be the way "peers" is interpreted for obvious reasons. Tough situation, but I don't think the judge should be criticized for a reasonable precautioun well within his discretion here.
ReplyDelete