One of the Occupy protesters is charged with assaulting an NYPD officer. However, she can’t be tried at this time because they can’t find enough potential jurors who don’t see the Occupy gang in an unfavorable light.
It is the most important question being asked of dozens of New Yorkers lined up as potential jurors for the trial of Cecily McMillan, an Occupy Wall Street activist accused of assaulting a police officer: what do you think of her protest movement?
Unfortunately for those keen on the swift procession of justice, a series of Manhattan residents who presented themselves at the criminal courthouse this week declared that they strongly disagreed with it – and could not promise to be impartial about one of its members.
…..
And as one after the other was rejected – either by McMillan’s attorneys, state prosecutors, or the judge – a jury selection process that the defence had hoped would be completed in one day reached the end of a second with only seven of the 12 jurors’ seats filled.
When you and your friends refuse to grow up and learn the difference between “Private Property” and “Personal Property”, (hint: there isn’t any) people who have to live and work in the real world tend to not enjoy having to share oxygen with you.
On a different note, why do we have to go to the UK for this news? Is the US media this biased towards the Occupy tweakers that they can’t dare report this?
Found via American Glob blog
If a KKK member assaulted a cop, they would have the exact same problem with biased jurors, but somehow that wouldn’t stop the judge from seating a jury.
As a follow-up, if a guy rapes and kills, serves 3 years on a 25 year sentence, gets out, rapes and kills, serves 10 years on a 25 year sentence, gets out, and assaults a cop, they still seat a jury. It should be the Defense’s choice whether to bring up prior bad acts. If the Defense brings it up, then it should be fair game.