I have no opinion regarding the guilt or innocence
of Yasin Abu Bakr relative to the charges against him before presiding judge, Mark Mohammed. The evidence will determine that.
However, I find the capitulation to the demands of the jurors by judge Mohammed has changed the paradigm. The jurors now have access to un-edited copies of three daily newspapers, use of telephones
and televisions, extra time to meet with relatives and one individual has access to a computer.
This is the new cost of Civic duty. Those provisions imposed by the judge will unduly diminish impartiality as a result of undue influence resulting from the mediums now being provided to the jurors.
Civic duty is not a holiday, it is a responsibility. No one can say for sure how influential the opinions of others will have on the jurors. Make no mistake, those opinions will play a role in the ultimate decision. The question is, who will get the short end of the stick, the State or the defendant?
|NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material
from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. |