Beiträge von Thalia

  • Liza Minelli spricht über Michael

    Liza Minelli recently did an interview with Daily Mail and talked about the Mchael she knew. She also said some nice words about Elizabeth Taylor.
    Liza Minnelli: Michael Jackson's love life, X-rated Lady Gaga and David Gest | Mail Online
    Quote:
    And she knows absolutely everyone. When she married music producer David Gest in London in 2002 (more of him in a moment), she was attended by Michael Jackson, Elizabeth Taylor and — bizarrely — Martine McCutcheon. Sadly, the first two are now dead. ‘But there’s not a day,’ she says, ‘when I don’t think of Michael.’


    She refuses to be drawn on the upcoming trial for involuntary manslaughter of Jackson’s doctor, Conrad Murray. But she’s happy to recollect the Michael she knew.


    ‘He was a supremely gifted human being but he didn’t survive, in my opinion, because he’d never been taught the rules of the game,’ says Liza. ‘He and his brothers and sisters were forced to rehearse round the clock while other kids were playing basketball.


    ‘Michael’s life was precisely the one dictated by his father. The family’s religion [the parents are Jehovah’s Witnesses] means the children weren’t even meant to be in show business. But, when they started making money for their father, that was it. Michael was used and abused almost from the time he was born.


    ‘Eventually, he distanced himself from his family, created this wonderful place — Neverland — for kids and supported different families. Then, one day, the father in one of those families called up Michael and said, “Unless you give me $30,000, I’m going to tell everyone you made a pass at my son.” And that’s when Michael called me.


    'Michal Jackson was a supremely gifted human being, but he didn't survive because he'd never been taught the rules of the game'


    ‘When he’d finished his story, I remember pausing and then saying: “Michael, maybe you should tell your lawyer about this.” He said: “But it’s insane.” So I repeated my advice. “It’s blackmail, though,” he said. “It is,” I replied, “and that’s Why you need to involve your lawyer.” But he wouldn’t.


    ‘What everyone forgets is that, when kids stayed at Neverland, their parents came, too. And they were treated grandly. But then other people jumped on the bandwagon.’


    She sighs. ‘I remember he was going with this girl and he was so in love with her. He came to show me the ring he’d bought for her. I asked him what he was going to say and he didn’t know. So I said: “Let’s rehearse,” and that’s what we did.


    ‘But the girl turned him down. She said she wasn’t ready to commit right now. She told him to ask again in six months. And it all but killed him. He was heartbroken. I knew all his girlfriends including Lisa Marie who became his wife.’


    Liza thinks she knows what killed her friend. ‘In the end, the scorn, the cruelty, the vicious meanness — these are the things that took his life. He was one of the best performers we’ve ever had. He changed everything. But he was only a king when he was on stage.’
    About Liz:
    Quote:
    On the other hand, Elizabeth Taylor — like Liza — was a survivor. ‘Elizabeth was just a regular girl. The glitter and the glamour and the gutter [as she witheringly dismisses it] were all in the photographs and the way stars like her were presented. The reality was that she was part of an era when movie stars were working actors. She went to the studio. She did her job.’


    Taylor’s no-nonsense approach to life is nowhere better illustrated than in this nugget of wisdom she passed on to Liza. ‘I remember calling her one day. I was crying about something awful someone had said about me in the press. There was a pause. “You read that stuff?” she said. She told me she never read a single thing about herself so I stopped, too, there and then, which meant there was never anything lousy going round and round in my brain. I thought that was good advice.’
    Click the image to open in full size.


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem…st.html?ito=feeds-newsxml


    Kann das bitte jemand übersetzen, irgendwann. :flowers:


    Wer könnte bloß das Mädchen gewesen sein? :oho:

  • Neuer Artikel zum Prozess von Matt Semino

    Doch, ich möchte ihn bestraft sehen.Michaels und der Gerechtigkeit wegen.


    Ich denke an seine Lügen u.a. dass er den Ärzten nichts von Propofol sagte. D.h. er wollte seine eigene Haut retten.Er wollte alles vertuschen wie möglich.Was hat er in dieser Zeit, in der er den Notruf nicht betätigt hat, tatsächlich gedacht? Hat er an die 150.000 gedacht, die er jetzt nicht mehr bekommt?


    Er wusste auch, dass Michael schon tot war, er wollte dass man im Krankenhaus den Tod feststellt......


    Man sagt ja, er wäre ein Soziopath.Die Merkmale sind da.Er hätte sagen können, wenn er ein verantwortungsvoller Arzt gewesen wäre, ja, ich habe Fehler gemacht.


    Im Übrigen sind die Staatsgefängnisse drüben voll, d.h. er wird vllt. in ein Bezirksgefängnis kommen und vllt. nach 1 Jahr freikommen, wenn er überhaupt zu den 4 Jahren verurteilt wird.

  • Taraborelli äussert sich zum Prozess

    Jackson's biographer, J. Randy Taraborrelli, told "Early Show on Saturday Morning" co-anchor Russ Mitchell it's "very important" to the Jackson family that Murray be found guilty, but, "The big question here is at what cost to Michael Jackson's reputation and to his legacy? Justice is very important and closure is very important. But nobody wants to see a character assassination of Michael Jackson. And that's something the family, the fan community and the estate are very concerned about where this trial is concerned."


    The early word, Mitchell pointed out, is that the defense will be "brutal."


    Taraborrelli, author of "Michael Jackson: The Magic, The Madness, The Whole Story, 1958-2009," said, "I think you're looking at a very desperate defense. If they're planning to show the film of Michael Jackson's press conference to demonstrate that he was depressed -- Michael Jackson looks very healthy in that film. Anybody who has seen that film will tell you that he looks like he was very capable and very ready for the tour, so that just shows you that there is a lot of desperation here.


    "You know, the fact of the matter is that Michael Jackson is not on trial. It doesn't make any difference what Michael Jackson's state of mind was. It doesn't make any difference what Michael's history was, or what his personal problems were at the time of his death. He's not on trial. Conrad Murray is on trial. And that's really what, I think, the judge has made a very strong decision to focus on in this trial."


    What about possible claims Jackson committed suicide?


    "Absolutely not. Absolutely not. There is just no indication of that by anybody who knew Michael Jackson well, as I did, (and anyone who did) knows he had such a love for his children and for his family that he just never would have done such a thing. You know, that's the kind of claim that people watching the trial who cared about Michael Jackson are concerned about, having (be) made in a court of law."


    Taraborrelli says family members have told him they're "doing fairly well. The kids are doing very well. They are in school. Paris is in acting classes. They take karate lessons. Prince is overseas now, representing one of Michael Jackson's charities. So they are pulling together. They're doing the best they can. But nobody wants to see their father dragged into another controversy."


    Ich muß um Übersetzung bitten,schon wieder, :herz: aber ich denke das Interview ist es wert. Michael hat sich nicht selbst was angetan u.a.


    Quelle lippstickalley
    CBS News

  • Murray vor Gericht - (seit) Januar 2011

    @LenaLena


    Hmm, ich bin da nicht so sicher, dass er sich da nicht mit seinen jetzigen Kollegen ausgetauscht hat. Tabu für den Prozess ja, aber für seine jetzigen Kollegen?Ob da nicht darüber gesprochen wurde.
    Man will den Mandanten unter allen Umständen freigesprochen bekommen, deshalb denke ich ja, man hat darüber gesprochen.
    Ja, ich kenne das aus eigener Erfahrung. Wird nicht anders sein drüben, wie hier.

  • Neuer Artikel zum Prozess von Matt Semino

    In irgendeinem Forum, ich weiß nicht mehr wo, hat ein User geschrieben


    "Michael kann diese Lasten nicht mehr tragen".


    Ich denke, deshalb sind wir alle hier, um zu tragen helfen. :d25:


    Mich nimmt das jetzt schon sehr mit, mehr als ich dachte.


    Aber ich bin ja nicht allein. :drück:

  • Murray vor Gericht - (seit) Januar 2011

    .....ob Michael so kindlich auf sie wirke, dass er unfähig war, Entscheidungen zu treffen. Verbessert mich, wenn ich etwas falsch gelesen haben sollte.


    Das ist es tatsächlich, wovor ich Angst habe, und das Matt Semino so treffend beschrieben hat.Tatsächlich ist Michael das Opfer, nur, er hat keine Stimme mehr.
    Und chernoff ist mit allen Wassern gewaschen, er will gewinnen.


    Und eigentlich müsste es doch um Murray gehen, warum er dieses und jenes so entsetzlich falsch gemacht hat.


    Nach wie vor halte ich es für einen großen Fehler diesen Nareg Gourjan, oder wie er hieß, für die Verteidigung zugelassen zu haben.


    http://content.usatoday.com/co…overdose-trial-underway/1


    The criminal trial of cardiologist Conrad Murray in the death of singer Michael Jackson is underway, Martin Kasindorf reports from Los Angeles.
    In the cramped Los Angeles courtroom of superior court judge Michael Pastor, lawyers began up to two days of questioning the potential jurors on what they had heard about jackson's shocking death of a drug overdose in June 2009.
    Murray, 58, Jackson's personal physician, was at the famous entertainer's bedside when Jackson died at his rented mansion. Jackson had been rehearsing for a comeback concert tour that was to start three weeks later in London.
    Murray has pleaded not guilty to a charge of involuntary manslaughter. Prosecutors say he acted negligently in injecting Jackson for insomnia at his home with Propofol, a powerful anesthetic used in operating rooms. If convicted, Murray could be sentenced to up to four years in prison.
    Twelve jurors and six alternates are being selected for the televised trial, estimated by Pastor to take five weeks. Opening statements are planned for Tuesday.
    Twenty-seven jury prospects at a time were questioned in the jury box while the others watched from spectator rows. A handful of public spectators, all identifying themselves to reporters as Jackson fans, also were granted seats.
    Defense attorney Ed Chernoff led off the questioning,which was based on 33-page questionnaires that potential jurors had filled out.
    Chernoff asked those in the box how they remembered Jackson, who died at the age of 50. One woman said she remembered him "as a child in the Jackson Five."
    Chernoff, searching out possible biased opinions, asked if anyone felt that Jackson was so "childlike" that he was incapable of making decisions and should be "held to a different standard of responsibility." Murray's lawyers have contended that Jackson was drug-addicted and irresponsible, and caused his own death.
    One woman had said on the questionnaire that she believed Murray was "at least partially responsible" for Jackson's death, Chernoff said. But no prospective juror voiced that opinion under Chernoff's questioning.
    Chernoff said there will be a lot of "science" as evidence, but he suggested that other evidence is "frankly going to be about Michael Jackson's life."
    He said, "we're not trying to drag up stuff that people may not want to hear about."
    The questioning by the lawyers is aimed at revealing potential jurors who should be dismissed "for cause" -- bias toward one side. After a first batch of 27 people have been qualified as unbiased, each side can begin using its 10 peremptory challenges -- dismissals with no need to state a cause.
    -- Martin KasinThe criminal trial of cardiologist Conrad Murray in the death of singer Michael Jackson is underway, Martin Kasindorf reports from Los Angeles.


    Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor swore in 74 prospective jurors and lawyers in the cramped Los Angeles courtroom began up to two days of questioning about how much they they had heard about Hackson's shocking death of a drug overdose in June 2009.


    CAPTION
    By Irfan Khan, AP


    Murray, 58, Jackson's personal physician, was at the famous entertainer's bedside when Jackson died at his rented mansion. Jackson had been rehearsing for a comeback concert tour that was to start three weeks later in London.


    Murray has pleaded not guilty to a charge of involuntary manslaughter. Prosecutors say he acted negligently in injecting Jackson for insomnia at his home with Propofol, a powerful anesthetic used in operating rooms. If convicted, Murray could be sentenced to up to four years in prison.


    Twelve jurors and six alternates are being selected for the televised trial, estimated by Pastor to take five weeks. Opening statements are planned for Tuesday.


    Defense attorney Ed Chernoff led off the questioning,which was based on 30-page questionnaires that potential jurors had filled out. Chernoff asked those in the box how they remembered Jackson, who died at the age of 50. One woman said she remembered him "as a child in the Jackson Five."


    Chernoff, searching out possible biased opinions, asked if anyone felt that Jackson was so "childlike" that he was incapable of making decisions and should be "held to a different standard of responsibility." Murray's lawyers have contended that Jackson was drug-addicted and irresponsible, and caused his own death.


    One woman had said on the questionnaire that she believed Murray was "at least partially responsible" for Jackson's death, Chernoff said. But no prospective juror voiced that opinion under Chernoff's questioning.


    Chernoff said there will be a lot of "science" as evidence, but he suggested that other evidence is "frankly going to be about Michael Jackson's life." He said, "we're not trying to drag up stuff that people may not want to hear about."


    The questioning by the lawyers is aimed at revealing potential jurors who should be dismissed "for cause" -- bias toward one side. After a first batch of 27 people have been qualified as unbiased, each side can begin using its 10 peremptory challenges -- dismissals with no need to state a cause.


    By noon, 16 prospective jurors had been struck from the pool.

  • Neuer Artikel zum Prozess von Matt Semino

    The Casey Anthony saga is just one recent, glaring example of where such defense tactics went overboard in the courtroom. Anthony's legal team introduced an outlandish explanation of the victim's cause of death and leveled severe accusations at family members during their opening statement. All of their distorted claims eventually went uncorroborated during the trial. In the process, the victim's memory was soiled and witnesses' reputations were destroyed under the guise of an impassioned client defense. The judicial process is only cheapened when such machinations run unchecked in a court of law. The Conrad Murray trial also risks running amok if precaution is ignored.


    While millions of trial observers thought Anthony's defense theory was pure fantasy, it stuck in the minds of the jurors who ultimately acquitted her. As Casey Anthony enjoys her freedom, Caylee Marie Anthony will never able to tell us whether she actually climbed up that ladder into the pool and drowned. Her cause of death remains a mystery. Similarly, Michael Jackson will also never be able to tell us how he departed from this earth. When it is only the words of the accused against the silence of the deceased, who is there to defend the victim from false accusation and innuendo?


    While it may become easy for some to forget, Dr. Conrad Murray is currently the individual on trial, not Michael Jackson. Use of the same Machiavellian strategies that were employed to defend Casey Anthony will need to be corralled and monitored vigilantly by judge, jury and the viewing public as the Murray case proceeds. The disastrous obfuscation of truth that occurred in Orlando only a few months ago can be prevented from repeating itself in Judge Michael Pastor's courtroom.


    Unfortunately, Murray's legal team seems to have already taken more than a few pages from Jose Baez's playbook. In several pretrial hearings, it became evident that Murray's attorneys had intently studied the dynamics of the Anthony trial and the procedural factors that would ensure a favorable outcome for their client. They referenced the global media attention that the Anthony proceedings garnered and the potentially harmful influence of commentary from legal pundits as a way to rationalize sequestering jurors and preventing the trial from being televised. Judge Pastor made the intelligent decision to deny these requests which would have placed unreasonable restrictions on the freedom of the public, press and jury. Complete transparency is one positive step toward preserving the rights of the victim during this trial.


    If Conrad Murray's legal team is planning to use a "blame the victim" defense strategy, their opening statement and witness questioning will likely conflate negative perceptions and stereotypes of Michael Jackson into a twisted theory of death. Attempts were already made by Murray's attorneys to drag Jackson's financial affairs, physical and mental health, as well as past legal battles into the vortex of controversy. Witnesses were expected to testify for the defense on these salacious and highly irrelevant topics. Judge Pastor wisely ruled to exclude many of these witnesses, arguing that their testimony lacked sufficient probative value in addressing the primary legal questions of the case. A thorough examination of Dr. Conrad Murray's medical practices, ethical choices and standard of care is what really needs to take center stage in a court of law at this time. Michael Jackson's past has no legitimate place in this present trial.


    Asserting the appropriate element of judicial control through the pretrial phase, Judge Pastor has made a strong effort to prevent the impending court proceedings from devolving into a tawdry examination of Michael Jackson through unnecessary character assassination. He has attempted to act fairly toward both sides while also standing firmly to protect the victim. Pastor will continue to play a pivotal role in the coming weeks by ensuring that the prosecution and the defense act within the boundaries of professional ethics and follow proper trial procedure. It is also imperative that he clearly impress upon the jury their important role, responsibility and obligation in seeking the truth even through all of the smoke and mirrors.


    Ultimately, it will be up to members of the jury to keep all that is stated at trial by the prosecution and particularly the defense, in its proper perspective. Inflated proclamations are just hot air if not grounded in provable facts. Jurors shouldn't be distracted by such hyperbole. They must think critically and logically about whether the hard evidence that is presented in court actually comports with the claims made by the lawyers in their opening statements and witness questioning. It is only then that justice can be properly served without the victim ever being victimized again.


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…urray-trial_b_975131.html


    Mag das jemand übersetzen bitte? :Tova:

  • Neuer Artikel zum Prozess von Matt Semino

    Defending the Victim in the Conrad Murray Trial


    Should Michael Jackson be blamed for his own death? Jury selection is underway and opening statements are set to commence in the Dr. Conrad Murray involuntary manslaughter trial. International headlines are shouting, "Michael Jackson drank propofol moments before he died!" These questionable pronouncements allude to the defense theory that Murray's legal team is expected to soon present in a Los Angeles courtroom. Symptoms of a "blame the victim" syndrome are already showing.


    While sensational, it should be of no surprise that Murray's lawyers may argue that Michael Jackson took his own life by either injecting himself with propofol or ingesting it. Story-making is surely nothing new when it comes to the King of Pop. Turning the tables on the voiceless is also now in vogue with high-profile criminal defendants. It worked for Casey Anthony, Why shouldn't it also work for Conrad Murray? While "blaming the victim" may be a tempting and ultimately effective defense strategy, it is morally suspect when based in fabrication and driven by unsubstantiated factual claims.


    Although attorneys are charged with representing their client's best interests in court, ethical boundaries can be crossed in their dogged pursuit of that goal. As seen before, a clever defense lawyer can twist scraps of evidence, public perception and ingrained social stereotypes about a victim and the alleged crime into a convoluted narrative that lacks any element of truth. This unscrupulous practice can become the legal weapon of choice when the only objective is to place just a shred of reasonable doubt in the mind of one impressionable juror. It is a weapon that can be lethal if taken too far, denigrating the victim with each cut and ultimately corroding justice to its bone.

  • Murray vor Gericht - (seit) Januar 2011

    Eigentlich war ich jetzt schon irgendwo(es ist ja Schlafenszeit) und doch lässt mich diese excellente Gesundheit von Michael und die Lungenentzündung nicht los.
    Das sind aber nur meine Gedanken.
    Schon eine banale Grippe lässt mich nicht so arbeiten wie ich eigentlich will, d.h. ich fühle mich schlapp, habe Gliederschmerzen u.a.


    Eine Lungenentzündung hat schon ein anderes Kaliber, d.h. Schüttelfrost mit Fieber, eine Verwandte von mir wurde deshalb ins Krankenhaus gebracht.


    Ortega u. Philipps suchten Michael zu Hause auf, wegen dessen Nichterscheinen zu den Proben.. Murray sagte doch daraufhin zu Ortega er sei der Arzt. Kann es evtl. sein, dass Murray diese Lungenentzündung bei Michael zwar erkannt hat, aber ignoriert hat.Unter allen Umständen ignoriert hat!

  • Hintergrundinformationen über die StPo in Kalifornien

    Spectators Kicked out of Conrad Murray Trial
    September 22, 2011 12:25 PM EDT


    On Wednesday, jury selection for the Conrad Murray trial continued. Dr. Murray is accused of having a role in Michael Jackson's death in 2009 from a drug overdose. Devout Jackson fans have packed the courthouse to get a glimpse of Dr. Murray during court proceedings.


    Although the Conrad Murray trial is yet to officially begin, there has already been some bizarre behavior coming out of the courtroom. This is not surprising taking into consideration all the strange occurrences that took place at Michael's own court cases. The day Mr. Jackson appeared in court wearing pajamas during his child molestation trial comes to mind.


    According to a correspondent for TruTV, Jean Casarez, Wednesday's trial proceedings took place privately in chambers. Dr. Murray stayed in the courtroom sitting at the defendants chair. At one point, he got up to sit with his two bodyguards in the back of the court. As he walked over, he locked eyes with one of Jackson's fans sitting in the back row. The correspondent noticed the female fan give Dr. Murray "a strong, strong look." The bailiff went over to the back row and told the woman not to do that again. The woman loudly remarked, "If he stares at us, we're gonna stare right back." The spectator who did the staring and another woman she was with were then asked to leave the courthouse.


    The correspondent said she did not see Dr. Murray stare at either of the women and it looked like he only glanced in their direction. The female fans in question have been frequent spectators at the Conrad Murray trial proceedings. One of the them allegedly chased after the doctor in the past and screamed at him outside.


    It looks as though Jackson's fans are hoping the outcome of the Dr. Murray trial will be a guilty verdict. Until then, the bad blood between the fans and the doctor will continue to simmer.


    http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.a...81474980369769


    ....obwohl man nicht weiß, wer auf wen starrte,es scheint Murray blickte nur auf die Fans.Die auf ihn starrten, mussten das Gerichtsgebäude verlassen. :grübel:

  • Hintergrundinformationen über die StPo in Kalifornien

    Challenges to Jurors


    A challenge is an objection made regarding the prospective jurors which results in their dismissal from the panel. An individual juror may be excused after either a Challenge for Cause, a Peremptory Challenge, or by Stipulation of counsel.


    a. Challenge for Cause


    The challenging party must state a cause or reason Why the prospective juror
    should be excluded from the jury panel. The challenge is usually made out of
    the presence of the jury. Examples include actual or implied bias on the part of the prospective juror or the disqualification of a juror based on his or her inability to perform the required duties. The number of allowable challenges for cause is unlimited. The challenge is then either permitted or denied by the court.


    b. Peremptory Challenge (CCP Section 231)


    This type of challenge is exercised to exclude a prospective juror from the
    jury panel. No reason need be given by the challenging party. Assuming the
    peremptory challenge isn't being used to exclude a specific group of people (e.g., based on race or gender), it is granted automatically. If the challenge is being used to exclude a specific group, this may lead to a declaration of mistrial. If the maximum sentence for a felony offense charged is the death penalty or life with or without parole, the defendant and the prosecution may each exercise 20 challenges.


    c. Juror Excused by Stipulation


    This occurs when the court approves and both parties agree to excuse a
    juror. The number of allowable stipulations to excuse jurors is unlimited.



    Written Juror Questionnaires


    Sometimes written questionnaires are given to jurors prior to voir dire to assist in
    jury selection. These questionnaires can simplify the process of determining
    hardship and individual juror bias regarding the issues being tried. Questionnaires are usually prepared by counsel for a specific case.




    Preliminary Jury Instructions and Admonishment of Jury


    The judge may give preliminary instructions to the jury after voir dire is completed.
    The judge may inform the jurors of the different stages of the trial proceedings, and explain the language that will be used at trial.


    Opening Statements


    Opening statements explain to the jury what the party intends to prove in the trial.


    Presentation of Evidence


    In a criminal trial, the Prosecution must present their case first. The defendant will have an opportunity to present evidence after the prosecution ‘rests’ (concludes their case). The following will occur during the presentation of the case by either side:


    * Trial motions and objections


    * Witnesses called to testify


    * Exhibits marked or admitted




    Exhibits Marked and Admitted


    When exhibits are identified and described on the record, they will be
    assigned a number or letter. (Prosecution exhibits are usually marked by
    number, and defendant’s exhibits are usually marked by letter.)



    Closing Argument


    Closing arguments summarize each party's evidence as it proves its case or disproves the other party's case. During closing argument, the parties try to persuade the jury to vote in their favor. In a criminal trial, the People speak first, then the defendant, and then the prosecution will have another opportunity to argue.



    Verdicts


    A verdict is the decision by the jury. One Guilty and one Not Guilty verdict form for each felony count are prepared.



    Penalty Verdict – Capital Case - Separate Verdict Required


    If a defendant is found guilty of first-degree murder and one or more special
    circumstances are found to be true, the jury must decide if the punishment will be
    the penalty of DEATH or confinement in state prison for a term of LIFE
    WITHOUT POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE as to each count.



    Jury Instructions


    After closing arguments, the court must instruct the jury in the law which applies to the case. The jury instructions are printed documents discussed by the judge and attorneys beforehand. The judge reads the instructions to the jury and the jury has the instructions with them during their deliberations.



    Jury Deliberations


    Jury deliberation is the period during which the jury considers whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty. This occurs after closing arguments and jury instructions. The jury deliberations are confidential and only the sworn jury panel is present during deliberations. When deliberations begin, the jury will select a foreperson. The foreperson records the decision on a verdict form at the conclusion of deliberations. During deliberations, the jury may have questions that may be answered by the judge, in consultation with the attorneys, or they may request that portions of the testimony be read back to them.



    Jury Verdict


    The jury foreperson will notify court staff when the jury has reached a verdict. All parties will assemble in the courtroom and the judge will review the verdicts and then hand them to the Judicial Assistant to be read. Criminal juries must return a unanimous verdict as to all issues before them.



    Polling the Jury


    At either counsel's request, the judge may instruct the Judicial Assistant to "poll"
    the jury. Polling the jury means that each individual juror is asked whether he or
    she agrees with the verdict.


    Source: Los Angeles Superior Court
    positivelymichael


    Mag das jemand übersetzten. :flowers:
    Benutzt man den Prompt Übersetzer, wenn man sich die Mühe macht, versteht man vieles.