Hah, sounds like his "research" is trying it out on himself and deciding he didn't like it. And now that he doesn't like it, all of a sudden he finds the research valid. He's still only listening to opinions he agrees with. What a shallow twat.

Don't worry, though. When it turns out that "he, alone, can't fix it", he'll find some other scapegoat. It's what he does. Nothing bad is ever his fault.

It might be the first time two teams traded head coaches straight up like that

It is his 500th game

Maybe the Rooneys should punish Tomlin by trading him to the Jets

I hope you got them with Bleu cheese and not Ranch

Doink!

Nix is good, and Allen is great. But the prettiest pass so far was from rhe Broncos punter.

Promises made, promises kept!*

~* = Offer only valid for Broligarchs who give Donald Trump cash~

Oh good, you actually know what you are talking about.

Quick question: when the jury renders a verdict, is is only "thumbs up/thumbs down"? Or do they need to give any justification? Can they flat out say "The evidence is overwhelming, but we find the defendant Not Guilty because he is oh, so pretty!" and have that stand up? Or do they simply say "Not Guilty" and we never find out why?

... the things you quoted don't back up your statement. You quoted:

If they can’t all agree, this is called a hung jury, and the Judge will have to declare a mistrial. A mistrial does not mean that the case is over. After a mistrial, the prosecutor can choose to try the case again.

If they don't all agree, it's a mistrial in NYS, and although he doesn't get convicted right then and there, the State can try the case again. He is still in jeopardy, unless he runs for President, I suppose. That would be a interesting turn. (nvm, he is only 26, and can't run for President yet)

The only way for him to be out of legal jeopardy is for all the jurors to agree to let him off. They can do that by agreeing that the State didn't prove it's case adequately enough. Jury Nullification is when the jury says "Yeah, the State proved he did it, but it doesn't matter, it is in the best interests of Justice that he shouldn't be punished". And I really doubt you will get 12 New Yorkers to say that.

If that does happen, the State has very little recourse after that. They can't try him again, and have extremely limited avenues for appeal. (But they can appeal: see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_notwithstanding_verdict). One key thing I get from that is that jurors still need to deliver a rationale for their verdict, even if they nullify. If they say "we find him not guilty because of that chisled jawline", with no further justification, that may qualify to get overturned.

Lemmy's not gonna like what I have to say, but jury nullification is simply not going to happen here. It will require the entire jury to agree, and as popular as this POV is here on Lemmy, I sincerely doubt you will be able to sneak 12 NYC jurors through jury selection that are inclined to do this. Maybe for some other non-violent crime, but not for walking up to a man in front of the Hilton and shooting him dead, no matter what his rationale is. They all walk down Sixth Avenue regularly, they're not gonna all agree to hold this guy unaccountable for murder in broad daylight. (Particularly when they all mocked Trump for saying he could get away with it, one avenue over.)

Now, it is possible that one person might sneak on the jury who finds that Mangione is a sympathetic figure, and insists on not convicting him. But that is a different situation. When the jury is at a fundamental impasse and can't agree on any verdict (a hung jury) the judge will order a new trial and they do it all over again. And, it's also possible for Mangione to get let off entirely if the prosecutors are morons and make fundamental errors. (Case in point: Trump's Georgia trial, where Trump managed to run out the clock due to the prosecution's unforced errors). But if the evidence is really there, I really doubt 12 New Yorkers will agree and say "Yeah, he did it, but shouldn't be punished for it".

Yeah, that is more incompetence than I am used to. When we get driving bans and other emergency declarations, the local news will put that crawly thing on the bottom of the screen letting us know what's up. I bet they get complaints when it covers up the score of the game.

I live in an area that gets snow regularly. When we get a storm, there are precisely three things the news can report on:

• When they think it will stop
• Are the roads driveable
• Are there school or business closings

If there is nothing to report in those three topics, then it's just another slow news day. Just be glad they're not making TV news reports about trending Social Media topics, that's what our local news gets into when they run out of Sinclair propaganda (or Bills highlights) to run.

No. We elected a Reality Show host, we get all the drama. We voted for government by Tweet.

Of course there is, he can resign a job right after he takes it, as long as he has a napkin to write on

I'm hoping it makes the site of the new stadium they are building for the A's cave in, they did Oakland dirty and deserve whatever bad karma they get.

Trump is a master at misdirection, though. He floods the zone with bullshit, on purpose, so the media keeps talking about the crazy shit he says, and not the actual things he does. He won't do all of the things he talks about, but he can do any individual thing that he wants to. He is hoping to get away with things while we all chatter about the crazy shit he says.

So now that the election is over and we know we have to tolerate four more years of it, we are better off keeping any public resistance under the radar until he actually takes actions while in office, and prioritize responding to what he does over what he says.