Meet Jury foreperson Tomeka Hart:
https://heavy.com/news/2020/02/tomeka-hart/I've been selected for jury duty multiple times, and not selected for a jury simply because if it were a defendant's word against the word of the arresting officers I would tend to believe the police. Or that I questioned if a litigant was possibly an illegal immigrant and therefore would be breaking the law to be in the country to collect damages. Or in the case of a drug deaaler defendant, that I had friends or family who had suffered drug addiction or died of illicit drug oversdoses. Others were excluded from the same juries simply for having relatives who were police officers!
How was this evil partisan sack of excrement able to serve on this jury, with her views going undetected? Unless the fix was in, and both prosecutors and the judge welcomed an opinionated partisan juror, foreperson no less!, who would make the desired outcome that much easier.
But oops!
The partisans involved tipped their hand and made it national news when they made a show of resigning the case. Now with what they did exposed, the verdict will likely be thrown out and result in a new trial. They were partisan and got away with it. But then they got greedy in their partisan tipping of the scales, and it blew up in their faces.
It would be nice if judge and prosecutors would face criminal charges themselves for deliberately tainting a jury. I won't hold my breath.
She wasn’t the only juror harboring such views. Another Stone juror was an “Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views,” and yet another had donated to Democrat Beto O’Rourke and other liberal causes, according to Fox.
In November, she shared a story on Twitter on November 12, 2019, headlined, “Clinton says she is being urged by ‘many, many, many people’ to run in 2020.” The Stone trial was ongoing at that time. She also wrote, “So POTUS goes to the Bama game, gets a standing ovation from the home crowd, and Tide gets Rolled in their first loss of the season. 🤔🧐 Correlation doesn’t equal causation, but I’m just saying…”
Hmmm...
And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Seriously, how do lawyers on a case not look at 10 minutes of social media posts and see this kind of partisanship in a selected juror? I'd be interested in G-man's opinion on this, as he has no doubt tried cases and selected jurors.
And again, I wonder if this kind of negligence could be seen as deliberate jury tampering. I mean, this lady wears her liberalism on her sleeve, especially on social media, and has given roughly $1,000 to candidates and partisan leftist anti-Trump organizations in less than the last 6 months. With rabidly anti-Trump views, while on the jury for a Trump operative. How could any attorney possibly miss that? It's right out there. WAY out there.
