Comments on: Oregon occupiers acquitted: one juror’s statement

By: Asher Yatzar

Asher Yatzar — Fri, 04 Nov 2016 03:58:11 +0000

That was my first thought — they were overcharged.

Why not “criminal trespass” or even “armed robbery”?

By: And a Malheur wildlife refuge juror explains his reasoning on the "Not Guilty" plea - GraniteGrok — GraniteGrok

Wed, 02 Nov 2016 02:00:13 +0000

[…] From Overlawyered: […]

By: MattS

MattS — Sun, 30 Oct 2016 20:45:05 +0000

“The government had a complicated theory that”

The more you overtake the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain.

By: Bill Poser

Bill Poser — Sun, 30 Oct 2016 18:25:48 +0000

Both links are to an article about the juror’s letter but I don’t see the letter itself. is it not published?

By: Kirk Maxey

Kirk Maxey — Sun, 30 Oct 2016 17:49:25 +0000

The Bundy verdict really offers the best of all possible outcomes. It highlights the heavy handed mismanagement of public land by the BLM and other federal agencies, and their failure to get a conviction in this case was at least partly due to their efforts to concoct a more serious charge than the simple trespass that the defendants were clearly guilty of. It is rare for the common man to win such a confrontation with the feds, as Ruby Ridge and the fate of the Weaver family solemnly witness. So all of us can bask in the victory of having bloodied the BLM’s nose, and we are all now reminded that the government does not care about you, or your children, or their future or yours, or the land or the environment. The government cares only about extending its own power and minimizing the liability of its employees as they do that. In that context, this was a resounding victory for the liberty of all Americans.

By: Rich M

Rich M — Sun, 30 Oct 2016 17:06:49 +0000

As we trial consultants and jury jocks point out to our attorney clients: You don’t tell a jury what your case is about… A jury tells YOU what your case is about.