LIVE COURT | MA v. Karen Read Oral Arguments. Supreme Judicial Court hears motion to dismiss appeal

[@acousticprojekt]

I appreciate that the appellate Court pointed out that the prosecution should be as interested in polling the jurors as the defense. Because WHY would you want to spend all this time and money AGAIN (unless you are corrupt perhaps?)

[@camper4life22]

Also glad they pointed it out. Also why wouldn't they want to know the truth.

[@Lolabear00]

@@acousticprojekt exactly. The CW trying to detail this shows they're NOT interested in the TRUTH. we already know this too be proven fact by the birchmore case which Morrissey and these same cops over saw!!

[@Lolabear00]

@@acousticprojekt there can be no justice until justice is upheld.

[@GwynnyBly8256]

I love that all judges asked questions and pushed both sides.

[@esk2g]

It’s so fascinating.

[@AvalonCN]

Watching these appellate lawyers argue was incredible to watch. I have never watched this before and it was so different from arguments made during a trial. I see why lawyers specialize in this and trial lawyers don’t just continue on with this for their clients. Great video. Thanks for cover it EDB 💜

[@ErinStudio]

This is such an interesting appeal. I think the fact that jurors came out and said we did reach a verdict on these counts should mean something, especially since they explained they were confused about instructions.

[@carliesmith3252]

And it’s unopposed by any jurors which is interesting to me

[@vee_grave]

Appellate court is no joke. Gotta be quick on your feet. Definitely admire these attorneys for their skill.

[@michelleeven24]

Same.. my heart rate was up!

[@Lolabear00]

@@vee_grave not that ADA. He was unprepared and didn't have any arguement other than we don't want you to do it. The defense stood on better ground and cited case law. The reason they brought in this other guy to retry her is cuz no1 in the DAs office would do it. Smart, they don't want to go down with Morrissey and hang. They know there's no case and don't want to sink their careers.

[@CR3271]

Never seen an appellate argument before. Now I understand better why Sarah Boone's lawyer said he would pass the buck for her appeal. Thanks for sharing this.

[@trishfrancis9212]

Very few trial attorneys file the appeal. That process is done by attorneys that specialize in appellate law.

[@michelleeven24]

Yeh this was cool

[@tracyhaverstick5672]

You really didn't listen to the appellate argument on presidential immunity? I am shocked. Our very existence as a country was on the line. Just so you know, appellate arguments are available to hear and/or see and effect us all.

[@Feline_Frenzy53]

I was amazed at how calm and clear the appellate attorneys were. I could never shift topics and keep that calm that quickly. Very educational. Thank you, Emily.

[@katiesmith9176]

It reminds me of a competitive military board 🤣

[@esk2g]

It’s like debate team essentially.

[@ChildOfGod0621]

Has anyone brought up or argued that THE JUDGE gave instructions to the jury before deliberations to NOT WRITE ANY DECISIONS UNTIL THEY HAVE AGREED ON ALL 3 COUNTS???

[@marmite.]

I've just asked the same , didn't see your comment ❤

[@lil_PowPow]

@@ChildOfGod0621 YES! One of the many things I've been stuck on regarding this stage of deliberation/verdict. There's a hidden plethora of problematic gems like this ... from the incident of what is still unknown as to what happened to John O'Keefe. To even now; only a small group of the authorities involved in this disgraceful side show investigation being shuffled around from their positions with one of them actually being promoted (lieutenant I believe). The reality that most of us couldn't even fathom the cost of this defense team. This feels like it can happen to anyone surrounded by this twisted power, which most of don't even know the connections of 👥+🤑=🔌⚖️ (huge concern🤦🏽‍♀️) As Emily mentioned, and many of us have been so curious about the FBI investigation. We want to trust this system of justice we have because it should be something we're proud of (much like democracy) -- only if it's done correctly as intended. I hope the SC Judges are taking into consideration the lack of evidence/proving any of the charges by the Commonwealth

[@NerdyDogMom1]

But doesn’t she just read the jury instructions that both the state and defense agree to? It’s not on the Judge if the defense agreed to that language.

[@esk2g]

@@NerdyDogMom1this is true ultimately. It’s going to be denied but it’s so wrong. The state should have done the correct thing.

[@esk2g]

They want to spend millions just to safe face.

[@mommajo2781]

They can simply ask the question “Did you as a group reach a not guilty verdict on charge 1” Please answer only “YES OR NO” if yes then ask the same question for charge 3. If all answer “Yes” then ask The question “Did you know that you could let the judge know that you could give her the verdicts on charges that were agreed upon” If the answer is “No” to that question Then double Jeopardy applies

[@Xershade]

Yeah okay, and the fear of death they've openly admitted to since trial ended comes in where? I don't know about you but if I got a mistrial I don't want the next Kari coming along and saying "Well 4 jurors contacted me saying they all voted to convict" and get sent to prison. Also count 2 alone is a much easier case to prove on its own, the prosecutors don't need to bring in the whole circus to prove intent on it.

[@lseh]

This is why the forms should be clear and ALL forms should have an answer and signed, not left BLANK. 🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️

[@brittanykay51]

I didn’t know apellete judges just poke holes in arguments, found my new dream job 😂

[@TheEmilyDBaker]

It's literally all they do is poke at the arguments from both sides.

[@susanlee1827]

Right!!! I thought the same. The Defense ASKED for clarification and the judge told them no. I remember thinking that was really not going to be good. I remember them arguing back and forth and her being very adamant that she didn’t care because “that’s how we do it in Massachusetts.”

[@mxnjones]

Massachusetts. “That’s how we do it in Massachusetts.” Judge Cannone’s argument was (and is) BS, in my opinion. She absolutely was in error here, in rushing to declare a mistrial.

[@suzannemiller-1954]

Yes I agree. She was against the defense in my opinion

[@susanlee1827]

@@mxnjones ooos of course it was Massachusetts! That’s what I get for multitasking. 😜

[@jennrocchi6385]

Rewatch crew checking in, still in my pj's at 230pm to say thank you EDB for taking us into this part of the judicial system that we dont usually get to see. very interesting & gives me a new appreciate for all the knowledge that lawyers & judges have! gotta be on your toe for real!

[@katharineshade9550]

Ditto, never seen this before!

[@JayeEllis]

Well, yes, appellate court, I AM implying that when there are multiple charges, the judge MUST ask if the impasse is on some or all charges! That's kind of their job, actually.

[@SweeetPea13]

Can we read the instructions and the court transcripts bc I swear Judge Cannone said (paraphrasing) if there is confusion between the written instruction and my spoken instruction, then follow my spoken instruction. So if she told them one thing and the written instruction said another, shouldn't the SJC really be reviewing that?

[@camper4life22]

I think that's what she said as well.

[@SoSoSteph]

I had to hire a separate appellate attorney for my custody case. My trial attorney said nope. Get somebody else to do it lol and I won

[@karmaMatters123]

If I was a taxpayer paying for all of this, I would be beyond infuriated! I’m just a Canadian following all of this very closely and I’m beyond infuriated!

[@karenschoonmaker]

I am and I am! I am. Embarrassed that this went down in my state. It’s disgraceful!

[@kimdelorme6314]

Me too. I am Canadian as well‼️🇨🇦

[@mkpetersen1607]

And it feels like it all could have been avoided by simply polling the jury 🙄

[@dianamead2990]

I feel the judge should have checked the form for a signature and the options marked and also polling the jury..

[@mkpetersen1607]

@@dianamead2990 right?!? She should have seen it and stopped this whole predicament from happening!

[@wee_Fergus]

Stressing me out! Whew, at least the judges have calm voices❤

[@laimanarbute4188]

It was so unexpected to me that they started interrupting from the beginning😅😅

[@wondergal4729]

I feel like Judge Canonoe wanted the trial to be over so she jumped to declaring a mistrial without thinking about asking for jury polling. At the end of the day, she could've prevented all of this if she's just slowed down to ask one question "are you at an impasse on all counts?"

[@GoblinsAreAGirlsBestFriend]

Pretty sure I heard somewhere not polling is pretty usual in MA?

[@wondergal4729]

@GoblinsAreAGirlsBestFriend fair but this whole case felt like extra precautions should've been taken. I'm also just coming off the Sarah Boone trial where a judge Kraynick covered allll the bases.

[@NerdyDogMom1]

The defense also was wanting a mistrial and didn’t want more deliberations. But yes that seemed too quick although I strongly believe the defense would have agreed to the mistrial if been asked.

[@dpoopie]

Yes the law there allow the judge discretion declare mistrial when it's impasse in that juncture. She should asked the lawyer. But for strategically reason they didn't object that become a huge hurdle right now.

[@jasl9987]

Or Karen reads lawyers could have asked lol

[@katiesmith9176]

I think the concept of double jeopardy is the most eloquent and fair elements of our law. I stand with the jury’s original verdicts. This is heartbreaking

[@marmite.]

Why didn't they say Judge Bev told the jury Not to fill in the jury form until they had come to a decision on all charges..Or did I miss that somewhere???..

[@lilypiscak3296]

Thank you! You wrote my comment for me!

[@esk2g]

There must be some reason that is moot. I’m thinking bc the instructions were agreed to on both sides. If they aren’t bringing it up it’s bc it’s not going to help them.

[@PrincessPoohs]

Why did he not immediately bring up the erroneous jury instructions that clearly caused a misunderstanding to occur when the male judge began asking about how it wasn’t an acquittal because none of the elements such as a signed verdict form were met.??? They have to introduce the element of the misleading at best jury instructions in order for this to have legs!

[@XTRL_DATA_SCI]

The problem was the jury instructions, not the jury form. The instructions specified they had to come to verdict on all three counts else report hung on all. That’s automatic error. There was a hearing on problems with the jury form, that first Cannone denied, but then made a minor correction to the jury form: never to the jury instructions. Did DFDTs counsel request fix re instructions, and heard, but no ruling? Need transcript. Anyway, Cannone was on notice of issues and should’ve polled the jury if only in abundance of caution on the fact that there had been a hearing on the jury form that retained potential issue; and 6th amendment hazard easy to expect from jury instructions. I love the idea of impeaching the foreman because whoever that was spoke for all the jurors incorrectly.

[@Lolabear00]

Why didn't he bring up the fact that the jurors were told not too check the jury slip until a verdict was made in ALL CHARGES?? Her instructions confused the jurors as well as did the jury slip which SHE ADMITTED SHE FAILED TO GIVE THEM THE UPDATED SLIP!!!!

[@joshn1678]

Yeah, I feel like this is so easy, yet we make this nonsense like a damn rat in a maze, it's insane.

[@wendywebberly7362]

Yup. I didn’t like Judge C

[@Lolabear00]

@@wendywebberly7362 me either she's so corrupt. I've never in my life and I've been in courts for 30+years, seen a judge stop a defense attny in the middle of a wisdom, to all the DA if he wants to object. Like WTF?? if he's sleeping on it that's his bad it's not her job to do that. Her job is to decide on legal issues that's it. If he objects she rules whether yes or no but she's not suppose to superimpose herself into the case and she has in a big way. She's in in the corruption period. She's pissed Karen brought in attnys that know more than the CW. She wanted Karen to take a plea like everyone else but they held her feet to the fire and with the feds investigating you would think she wouldn't have been so obvious!!!

[@beepboop8374]

@@Lolabear00I’ve seen so many people talking about her relationship with the Albert’s too

[@Justjastil]

Replay crew love your dedication to this. I am in my robe as well🎉

[@hope7144]

Robes and sweat pants are the best !

[@lydiaanderson824]

Replay crew: This is so fascinating. The court and lawyers are so thoughtful and intelligent.

[@katzolitamason6729]

This was fascinating and very interesting to hear- was amazed at the extent of their questioning and it was very educational.

[@susanmullaney9359]

Canone said there is no checkbox for "Not Guilty" because the jurors would just leave the "Guilty" line blank. The lawyers should have been shown the jury slip: all lines would have been blank.

[@NerdyDogMom1]

They said they talked about it on the bus ride how weird it was and if they realized that they acquitted on those two charges.

[@FlyingTeaRex]

This whole thing feels soo unfair for the jury. They suffered through this mess of a trial and then they weren’t properly listened to because they misunderstood a part of the procedural instruction. The judge failed them in my opinion. Even if she followed their local rules, it’s wrong and the rules should be changed. This mess could’ve been avoided if the judge made sure to have a thorough and clear record before the jury was dismissed.

[@Lolabear00]

Mass laws are ridiculous. Ive worked in the court system for 30+years and I've seen jurors polled multiple, multiple times weather a verdict was reached or they were at an impasse but esp if they were at an impasse esp with a defendant with multiple charges worth the number 1 question being have u reached a verdict on any of the changes? If yes then which charge and what was the verdict? These jurors have said they aquitted her on the FIRST DAY of charges 1 & 3 ande it was never discussed again so why would the defense NOT bring THAT up HERE!?!? Also why didn't they mention that there was bullying in the jury room AFTER the Tuhey instructing?

[@Swooptidoo]

This was interesting to watch. Thank you for going over it with us :)

[@beepboop8374]

Why are they not bringing up that judge Canone told the jury not to give her any information on a split verdict?!?!

[@PrincessPoohs]

He’s making the wrong argument! The argument isn’t that the judge should have gleaned that there was a verdict on some counts, although yes she erred in not asking- the argument is that the jury instructions were extremely confusing and stated that they shouldn’t sign their verdict slip until they had come to a unanimous decision on ALL CHARGES. That is erroneous and misleading, and is what directly caused the confusion for the jurors! Why isn’t he addressing that and trying to argue uphill about why the defense didn’t object to the mistrial??

[@AngelPrissy]

Why didnt the defense bring up Judge's instructions to the jury which said to not turn in the form until answer all and that the written instructions take precedent over instructions. They were confused but trying to follow orders.

[@Notpublished]

And she has to pay her lawyers again for a retrial because the judge didnt poll the jurors?

[@beckabones]

Rewatch crew I love this,he's very knowledgeable and I think he did well. Love the questions asked by the panel

[@cosmicpr2707]

I love watching appellate court in action. It's really interesting to see how the lawyers think on their feet when responding to the justices questions. And, equally compelling is hearing the questions the justices ask - the probing, analytical, "what if" questions. Fascinating. I took the opportunity to watch the Kansas Supreme Court in action via its website. Quite interesting.

[@pameldacamel]

Why would they even agree to hear this if they were already decided that they didn’t meet the burden??? WTAF what a waste of time and money.

[@kimberlybailey9808]

This is fascinating. Thank you Emily.

[@DAISYCHEWYandME]

Thanks for explaining the "My Brother"

[@nadineevans5195]

Forms should require, guilty, not guilty, couldn't come to a verdict.

[@SharonFinn-nl9lt]

For each count.

[@lseh]

What about what her verbal instructions were vs her written instructions

[@rhonwynv]

Is "my brother" in Massachusetts like "my learned friend" in commonwealth nations? edit: Never mind! EDB answered this in the stream!

[@norellemaher2956]

The judge said they only tick the box if she was guilty, no ticks, not guilty surely

[@wondergal4729]

Watching an appellate court is so fun! Thank you for explaining as we follow along.

[@AnaFox]

Omg, 13 min in and this already reminds me of the oral exams I had in my law degree, which were one big reason I didn't finish. The tension!

[@Scouty159]

I loved this back and forth. This is interesting and you learn so much.

[@tammylt5004]

Replay in my jammies - TY for covering this. Love this insight into this area of law we rarely see.

[@jaila2806]

"If you are questioned like this in everyday life" 😂😂 as a Dutchie I didn't perceive this kind of hearing as rude at all. This IS a normal convo in everyday life of a Dutch person 😂. Honest, straight to the point, leave no room for misconception. I honestly don't understand how people can find that rude 🙈

[@timeonlinemusic]

appellate judge would be the PERFECT position for judge john judge

[@beepboop8374]

Except he’s so polite I don’t think he would be able to interrupt 😂

[@Scouty159]

I loved this back and forth. This is interesting and you learn so much. The dissecting of the arguments is sooo fun.

[@Stolimel]

This is so much more captivating than hearing the drone of lally in trial.

[@Scouty159]

100% agree

[@MistyMoorsHomestead]

Absolutely love a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday stream situation

[@jules.b5141]

Thanks Emily for your commentary, it helps me understand. The Karen Reid appellate court was so interesting. I’m from the UK and wish this land televised this kind of stuff. But this judicial system has too much to hide 😡

[@wendywebberly7362]

I guess judge Canolli can never be wrong. They all stick up for each other

[@brandyatencio8604]

Well damn! I'm so glad I found your channel. So interesting. When I started college I wanted to be in law, this stuff reminds me why. Love your content, keep rocking EDB!

[@Kai-here]

This is so stressful and yet they are so calm! How?! I could never 🙈

[@mairerayburn7370]

This is the most fascinating thing I’ve ever seen. This is my favorite content you have covered so far. Thank you!

[@dkime95]

Now I want to start watching appellate hearings! So interesting and entertaining to watch the judges’ rapid-fire questions.

[@wendyarlene7191]

Fascinating to watch, thank you Emily!

[@redondobeach7514]

I missed the beginning of the hearing, I am a lawyer wannabe, but it seems to me even a mistrial should be double jeopardy even in a mistrial the prosecution couldn’t do their job. It blows my mind they’re gonna do this again.

[@marleysmith281]

This is my thing too. The prosecution now knows every hole in their own argument they need to fill, and every method and strategy the defense has. It doesn’t seem fair in a case like this where the defense asked for clarification and was told no, and where the judge told them not to fill it out until they were unanimous (I think?). It was a recipe for disaster.

[@M1dn1ght999]

Loved watching this type of argument!

[@angelasandersbooks]

I joined the Navy at 17. I'm now 47. After being a Law Nerd for over 2 years, I wish I would have gone to law school. It would've saved my broken body. Lol. But seriously, lost opportunity. It seems right up my alley.

[@beepboop8374]

Healthcare for almost two decades for me: and same.

[@JennieBu]

Watching on replay crew cuz I’m on the West Coast and I just woke up!!!

[@rborden3452]

Replay crew here. Thank you soo much for the pyjama stream today. A much much needed stress relief. Fascinating to see how justice works and so glad the court allowed cameras. I am strongly in favor of cameras in every courtroom, it adds so much to our understanding.

[@mairerayburn7370]

As an autistic person who really struggles with masking and reading people, the strict boundaries and lack of emotion and concentration on fine point details is a literal dream. I love watching trials but I have to take a lot of breaks due to the theatrics and emotion that comes in. Some lawyers and witnesses I literally cannot watch because they give me so much anxiety.

[@mxnjones]

As an autistic person myself, I feel this in my soul…but I am also a highly emotional person who struggles separating my own anxieties from the logic required to be decisive (because brains and feelings are both weird).

[@mxnjones]

I’m rewatching in my comfy Gap sweatshirt and jeans. I wasn’t caffeinated enough to understand everything I watched this morning; the appellate process seems so stressful, yet interesting. The lighting in that courtroom is so good! Can I just bring in my painting stuff? I could get so much done in such a well lit space. Thank you to all you lovely Law Nerds for your congratulations on my grant! I think it’s time for a new easel or one of those fancy cutting machines.

[@TheEmilyDBaker]

It's an incredibly stately room!

[@caren_e_short]

The entire building-the John Adams Courthouse-is gorgeous and has incredible history. The SJC is older than the US Supreme Court. I guarantee you’ve seen the outside of the building on a legal TV show (Boston Legal, for sure)! I encourage you to visit if you’re in Boston!

[@Atalinay]

That was very interesting I had fun. I definitely want to watch that again 😂 I can get annoyed when council skirts around answering questions, so the interruptions made sense

[@norellemaher2956]

why did the judge choose that jury foreperson?

[@needsmorecakepronto]

replay crew - thank you for being my only smile this morning with your pajama party

[@Budgie-Vic]

BEST video ive watched in a long time! FASCINATING...Being from uk where we see little of our law system. Loved the proper nerdiness of this too! Loved to see the knowledge and skills of these people have, especially the soooo experienced defense! So thought proviking! Brilliant commentary too!!! 2 hrs so well spent, not a thing I can often say after watching youtube!! Yes it 'tickled' my non lawyer brain and feel better for it!!!

[@mamaheim]

REPLAY CREW!!! 🎉🎉

[@mariaandcream]

I truly enjoyed this. Thank you Emily.

[@CarolMalenfant]

Emily thanks for teaching me about appellate courts….nothing like actually watching it in action

[@NerdyDogMom1]

That was really interesting to watch!!

[@michaela_freeman]

Yes!!! We like a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday stream!!! Yes!!!

[@bthe1doright462]

I tried to watch listen feel reason my way through 30 minutes of the Supreme Court Hearing - - I have NO Legal Background. I am smart and reasonable and very intuitive. I got the gist but the high level of doubting Thomas Resistors on the Panel was TENSE and Frustrating for Me. In the End I Didn't Actually Understand Why They Were SO Resistive to Seeing The Problem with NOT Spelling Out During Proceedings That the Jury Came to Some Agreement that Was Counter To Fully Guilty - - and Press the Start Over Instead of Steering Through the Rapids and Obstacles to Get To The End of and Release of Karen Reads ORDEAL.

[@robertridley9279]

This is better than court tv. They don't spend enough time explaining what's happening in the courtroom for people who aren't lawyers.

[@CarolMalenfant]

It’s all about the confusion of the form….

[@janaturner1791]

Wasn't there an argument about the verdict slip? Like it didn't have a place to check not guilty on one of the charges?

[@ninastanek3388]

It was obvious for me that the defense was happy with the mistrial, after Yannettis speech to the media. They regretted it after the Jurors came forward. Understandably, but they missed to ask the Judge to inquire the impasse on each charge

[@rileyallen489]

Watching that gave me war flashbacks to my capstone defense.

[@wee_Fergus]

More and more appreciate my boss’ boss who is our corporate lawyer!! I can’t, glad he can

[@Alana2U]

I guess if this goes to Supreme Court it would set precedence. If a jury of 12 has found you NOT GUILTY then you are NOT GUILTY.

[@molliwilson5639]

Loved this. It was fascinating

[@kirstenL475]

Love the rewatch Emily, so much appreciated and even betta in my jammies 😊. Thank you

[@LilMomma_1]

LOVE seeing this appellate hearing! have never seen one. this is amazing and so cool

[@mkpetersen1607]

It's so refreshing to see respectful and calm discourse! There hasn't been a single outburst 😱 Didn't know it was possible 😂

[@jennrocchi6385]

same here! so glad EDB covered this to show us this part of the process!! so interesting to get a glimpse into the parts of court we don't usually get to see!!

[@marleysmith281]

I love the questions for both sides from the same judges. The process seems pretty unbiased and fair with how tough they are on both sides

[@RyFish1]

Great show - thank you Team Baker!

[@AnaFox]

Just out of a mid-term, time to Emily!

[@speckle2592]

Hope all your exams go well!

[@AnaFox]

@@speckle2592aw thank you so much 🫶

[@patrishchange1504]

@Emily D Baker. This case is bigger than local. People all over the country and in Europe are following this case. I, myself have been following this case locally and follow many creators covering this case. It’s huge. I see where people are from that are following this.

[@mkpetersen1607]

One thing I don't understand: didn't the judge see the verdict slip? Shouldn't she have noticed that they in fact DID come to some verdicts? Even if they didn't declare the verdicts as needed by law, she should have seen it and immediately consulted the lawyers BEFORE dismissing the jury. It felt like she rushed to get the jury dismissed (I don't believe it was done in bad faith but only to respect the time of the jury).

[@beepboop8374]

They didn’t fill anything out because they were told by Judge Bev not to unless they came to verdicts on *all three counts* which is why they were so confused. Then she declared a mistrial and asked them to go to a room and she would be right there, and they assumed she would poll them… but she didn’t.

[@mkpetersen1607]

@beepboop8374 but they did. They filled out two of the three verdict slips. That's the whole issue. The reason why they didn't say anything is because the jury instructions said "don't come back until you have FILLED OUT all 3". And since they couldn't decide on #2, they thought they couldn't return any of them.

[@beepboop8374]

@ where did you hear they filled anything out? I’ve heard in all the trials they didn’t fill anything out at all

[@beepboop8374]

@ I think they said multiple times that the verdicts were never memorialized in writing and that’s how we got here. If what you’re saying is true then I don’t think we would have gotten to this point

[@mkpetersen1607]

@@beepboop8374 I might be remembering it incorrectly then. I thought they had filled them out but didn't hand them over

[@kimbracrowder3263]

Repkay crew here. I have a question. Couldn't they have argued that the jury instructions were ambiguous (I know an objection was made and the judge made a small change) and that combined with verbal instructions not to fill out the forms until they had reached a verdict on all counts created the mindset within the jury that prevented them from filling out the forms?

[@jessicathomas73]

This has been very interesting to watch. I enjoy listening to legal argument, especially at the Supreme Court level.

[@cd566]

I'm an in house counsel and this is what discussion with my boss is. We always discuss like that

[@whoever6458]

OMG, appellate court is the best thing ever!

[@super·nothingg]

I love Weinberg. Also i think if the commonwealth dont want the jury instructions to change incase it encourages partial verdicts, then it should be MANDATORY before declaring a mistrial for the judge to ask first if they are hung on all counts. This is really awful she will probably be tried again on all counts

[@KatieBSewCrafty]

Can we take a quick second to sidetrack on how beautiful this courtroom is?!

[@staceya4879]

“My head is full of song lyrics” 😂 me too, me too.