Twitter: Cowboys K Brandon Aubrey misses practice for jury duty

[gimmesix]

Guilty people prefer a jury. Defense attorneys prefer a jury. They only have to create a little doubt in one juror who isn’t the judge.

Agreed. If you are guilty, why would you want an educated judge who knows the law to decide? A good lawyer can sway a jury of your peers.

Of course, I'd let Aubrey decide all by himself because he's a god.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Agreed. If you are guilty, why would you want an educated judge who knows the law to decide? A good lawyer can sway a jury of your peers.

Of course, I'd let Aubrey decide all by himself because he's a god.

if you are innocent why would you want a judge to decide? using the same logic it would be nearly impossible to convince 12 people that an innocent person is guilty

 

[Typhus]

Our most productive scorer, jury duty.
Seems perfect.

 

[Coogiguy03]

Why give away our best player on the team?

And risk it all, hell yeah

 

[JJ1986]

Very good points.

OJ approves of this message

The initial vote for OJ was 10-2 with the two holdouts convicting. So the majority convinced the other two to change their votes to not guilty

 

[Creeper]

I am pretty sure there are no trials taking place on Sundays so Aubrey should be available for games.

 

[DallasEast]

Bad Puns by DallasEast

"Why wasn't Bryan Anger picked? He could have punted jury duty."

This has been Bad Puns by DallasEast

 

[shabazz]

The initial vote for OJ was 10-2 with the two holdouts convicting. So the majority convinced the other two to change their votes to not guilty

...."if the glove don't fits, ya gots to acquit.

 

[FLWarpigrpig]

Has this ever happened before? A player in season serving on a jury?

 

[FLWarpigrpig]

I am pretty sure there are no trials taking place on Sundays so Aubrey should be available for games.

As long as the jury is not sequestered.

 

[Jipper]

I am pretty sure there are no trials taking place on Sundays so Aubrey should be available for games.

yes unless he was sequestered in which case he would not be able to depart the hotel they are at.

However, doesn't sound that way so he should be fine.

 

[Jipper]

This guy is so lovable - he is incredible on the field and he doesnt act like hes above being a normal person...well done Aubry.

 

[maryquality]

This guy is so lovable - he is incredible on the field and he doesnt act like hes above being a normal person...well done Aubry.

Yeah...he's just over there doing his civic duty as a citizen of the U.S.A.

 

[gimmesix]

if you are innocent why would you want a judge to decide? using the same logic it would be nearly impossible to convince 12 people that an innocent person is guilty

I consider judges to be more impartial and informed, at least concerning the law. If I'm innocent, I'd think a judge would be harder to convince by a prosecutor that I'm guilty than a jury would be. I was watching some trial show where the show laid out the case from the perspective of the defendant because it appeared that there was a high probability of their innocence. In some of the cases, the juror agreed, but in some where I thought the jury would find the individual innocent, it did not. An emotional argument can sometimes overcome logic in a trial by jury. I think that's less likely when a judge is deciding.

 

[StarLord]

He might be the greatest kicker in NFL history.. but the jury's still out on him.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

I consider judges to be more impartial and informed, at least concerning the law. If I'm innocent, I'd think a judge would be harder to convince by a prosecutor that I'm guilty than a jury would be. I was watching some trial show where the show laid out the case from the perspective of the defendant because it appeared that there was a high probability of their innocence. In some of the cases, the juror agreed, but in some where I thought the jury would find the individual innocent, it did not. An emotional argument can sometimes overcome logic in a trial by jury. I think that's less likely when a judge is deciding.

The two points are a contradiction

Guilty people want a Jury because all they have to do is convince one person

But an innocent person wouldn't want a Jury trial as opposed to a judge trial, when a prosecutor would have to convince 12 people than an innocent man is guilty? When in theory the evidence says otherwise? The two stances don't make sense.

I get emotional decisions and juries...as well as judges don't always get the right verdict, but the same logic should apply

 

[gimmesix]

The two points are a contradiction

Guilty people want a Jury because all they have to do is convince one person

But an innocent person wouldn't want a Jury trial as opposed to a judge trial, when a prosecutor would have to convince 12 people than an innocent man is guilty? When in theory the evidence says otherwise? The two stances don't make sense.

I get emotional decisions and juries...as well as judges don't always get the right verdict, but the same logic should apply

A jury of your peers means that anyone can be a juror. If I'm innocent, I'd much rather have a judge who has had to pass a high bar to get where he is deciding than 12 people who work at Walmart (not that there's anything wrong with working at Walmart).

I understand your logic ... all it takes is convincing one juror of your innocence. I'd just rather trust my fate to that guy or lady behind the bench who had to work hard to get there and has a clear understanding of the law. But if I know I'm guilty, it would be the opposite. I'd want my attorney trying to convince just one of those 12 people from Walmart that I'm not guilty.

A judge can get it wrong, and it has happened like you said, but I'd trust my fate as an innocent person to the person whose life is the law over 12 random strangers.

 

[gimmesix]

The two points are a contradiction

Guilty people want a Jury because all they have to do is convince one person

But an innocent person wouldn't want a Jury trial as opposed to a judge trial, when a prosecutor would have to convince 12 people than an innocent man is guilty? When in theory the evidence says otherwise? The two stances don't make sense.

I get emotional decisions and juries...as well as judges don't always get the right verdict, but the same logic should apply

Evidence can be manipulated to an extent by a good prosecutor. In some of the cases I watched, it came down to how convincing the experts were who were put on the stand. They painted a picture that the jurors bought. Judges have seen it all and are not as easy to sway IMO as a peer juror who may have never been in a courtroom before.

Frankly, I see some merit to those who have argued that our judicial system needs to have paid professional jurors instead of just letting anyone be on a jury.

 

[WoodysGirl]

 

[Bigdog]

The Niners must be very worried about only weapon on offense that they influence Aubrey for jury duty.