Blagojevich

The Chicago Tribune covered it. The neat thing to get out of this article how the jury took the initial sounds. Instead of using up to vote straight "guilty / not guilty," used "fist of five," The way you've never heard of before.

The Tribune says:

Instead of the special ballot, and that they had "a handful of five" rating, a method of building consensus and suggested Karen Wilson. If members of the jury raised the hand with all five fingers, I mean, they were strongly inclined towards the guilty. The grip of the innocent. If members of the jury somewhere in between, the number of fingers held up a sign of how she or he tends.

Great!

After a little research, and this is apparently a way to take joint decisions in controlling corporate meeting, or at least in those companies, "Six Sigma" a kind of retreat where people discuss management and leadership skills, how to manage the business, etc..

Frankly, it looks like one of the neat ideas you get after a seminar, but really did not put in play. I'm glad to see it worked!

The last thing that stuck out of the jury, which considered the impact that will have a ruling on the family and Blagojevich. The newspaper also said:

The group discussed how the government will have an impact on the lives of his two children, daughters Amy, 14, and Annie, 8. At the end of the day, they said, pushed those feelings aside and focused on the evidence.

"Everybody grew up that he had a young family and her daughters," said President of the jury. "This is a real human being, and makes you kind of nervous. But we know we have a task to do and stuck to the evidence."

Sometimes we like to pretend that the jury will not be thinking about these things. Of course I will. We are all human beings. A good lawyer to consider this title, and maybe even it's a bit if the judge allows.

The third thing I noticed the power of lawyers give the "reptiles" reading this - hope the jury rule "send message" to other politicians. This is really how all the lawyers hope a jury will think. The examples in the hope that the verdict medical malpractice will send a message to other doctors / hospitals / nursing homes that will not be tolerated practice of dirty, or that the verdict car accident will send the message that safe roads are important, or even to defend the government sends a message that claims will not be rewarded bad. Of course, it is reversible error to say directly to the jury to "send a message."

Finally, the article linked above mentions several times how good I got to the jury along. This is not inconsistent with the jury Blago the past, where she was much more tense deliberations of the jury and in fact are not getting along. I think this is the tip of the trial is an attempt to select jurors who will work well with others. Stay away from the tremors.