16 hours ago, we_gotta_believe said:

You honestly think with as much publicity as this trial is getting, that she previously strangled other infants and we'd not have heard about it yet? That between co-workers, other misc hospital staff, or even internet sleuths from the area, somehow nobody put two and two together on that? Have you been in a maternity ward of a modern hospital?

Given how the prosecution handled this case, for a retrial I would start at square one all over again. Also, no , there's more to look into than strangulation.

All the bases need to be covered, and it's obvious they weren't.

18 minutes ago, Bill said:

Given how the prosecution handled this case, for a retrial I would start at square one all over again. Also, no , there's more to look into than strangulation.

All the bases need to be covered, and it's obvious they weren't.

You'd have better luck finding the tied up kids in the basement of that DC pizza shop. Zero point zero chance that she killed an infant in a major hospital's maternity ward and not a single person affiliated with the hospital brought those suspicious circumstances to anyone's attention once this trial became the public spectacle that it is.

After ripping the lone holdout juror, doing 100 media interviews to throw him under the bus, and in response people online started looking up the other jurors...now the judge does this.

Why isn't it already a thing to have some type of gag order to protect jurors?

3 minutes ago, NOTW said:

After ripping the lone holdout juror, doing 100 media interviews to throw him under the bus, and in response people online started looking up the other jurors...now the judge does this.

Should've done this a while ago.

31 minutes ago, NOTW said:

After ripping the lone holdout juror, doing 100 media interviews to throw him under the bus, and in response people online started looking up the other jurors...now the judge does this.

This may be a stupid question, but how does the public know that the holdout juror has past due rent but not his name? The people who have come out publicly sure, but for him how would a news group get that info but not any personal identification? Or does that mean they do have his name but don't want the heat of naming him? Just seems weird.

4 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

This may be a stupid question, but how does the public know that the holdout juror has past due rent but not his name? The people who have come out publicly sure, but for him how would a news group get that info but not any personal identification? Or does that mean they do have his name but don't want the heat of naming him? Just seems weird.

It could be made up to smear him, it could be gossip or rumors that got misinterpreted, it could be other jurors leaking info they learn about each other without naming a name so they can say they didn't name the person, who knows.

Jurors should be prohibited from speaking about other jurors. Only about their own experience. It impacts the juror's personal and professional life, but also sends a message to future jurors on other cases. Jurors should be protected.

19 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Or does that mean they do have his name but don't want the heat of naming him?

Pretty sure it's this one.

12 minutes ago, NOTW said:

It could be made up to smear him, it could be gossip or rumors that got misinterpreted, it could be other jurors leaking info they learn about each other without naming a name so they can say they didn't name the person, who knows.

Hard to imagine the guy volunteering that he's behind on rent and had a dropped DV case to the other jurors. I dunno.

6 minutes ago, Paul852 said:

Pretty sure it's this one.

That was my guess, but then the question is how did they get his name? Doesn't seem like info you could get non sketchily.

@Bill any ideas? You know this works better than us.

3 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

That was my guess, but then the question is how did they get his name? Doesn't seem like info you could get non sketchily.

From my understanding, I heard it's pretty typical for the media to find this information on their own (sitting in the courtroom and all). I don't know how true that is. The only other way I can think of is through another juror.

1 hour ago, DEagle7 said:

This may be a stupid question, but how does the public know that the holdout juror has past due rent but not his name? The people who have come out publicly sure, but for him how would a news group get that info but not any personal identification? Or does that mean they do have his name but don't want the heat of naming him? Just seems weird.

One of the local media outlets reported the unpaid rent thing. Presumably they have his name and crossed checked it against cases which are public record. They never published his name, at least not in the article I saw.

2 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Look at the insane activist jurors. Not a stretch to think they would look the guy up. They certainly tried to paint him in a negative light in their media tours.

That's not what happened:

The NBC10 Boston Investigators are uncovering new details about the lone holdout juror from the Lindsay Clancy murder trial.

Court documents and interviews with family members reveal a history of domestic violence allegations. We discovered a pending eviction case tied to months of not paying rent.

...

We are not identifying him at this time because he has chosen not to speak publicly and the jury list is currently impounded.

NBC Boston

Domestic violence allegations raise questions about holdo...

The NBC10 Boston Investigators are uncovering new details about the lone holdout juror from the Lindsay Clancy murder trial.

2 hours ago, we_gotta_believe said:

You'd have better luck finding the tied up kids in the basement of that DC pizza shop. Zero point zero chance that she killed an infant in a major hospital's maternity ward and not a single person affiliated with the hospital brought those suspicious circumstances to anyone's attention once this trial became the public spectacle that it is.

An investigation into her employment wouldn't be limited in scope to deaths.

1 hour ago, DEagle7 said:

Hard to imagine the guy volunteering that he's behind on rent and had a dropped DV case to the other jurors. I dunno.

That was my guess, but then the question is how did they get his name? Doesn't seem like info you could get non sketchily.

@Bill any ideas? You know this works better than us.

They 100% know who he is and they don't want the heat because they'd all be tossed in jail. Based on what I saw of MA law, they're already flirting with being in violation of it.

As far as the judge issuing his order, it was a day late and a dollar short.

16 minutes ago, Bill said:

An investigation into her employment wouldn't be limited in scope to deaths.

So when you said, "she's done this before" you weren't referring to strangulation nor death of infants in a maternity ward, but rather something else far more vague that you still can't quite articulate?

White woman are going to take our society down

Also, I talked with a neighbor's wife this weekend and apparently she's one of the looney tunes that thinks the husband killed the kids and staged the suicide attempt. I didn't press her on any details since she's part of the group we hang out with a lot and didn't want to strain any relationships, but apparently some people are far, far more detached from reality than they seem at the surface. I honestly don't understand how someone could even arrive at that conclusion given the fact that she's not disputing she even did it, but I guess that's just the world we live in now.

4 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

White woman are going to take our society down

now you how we feel when we listen to a trumper.

21 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Also, I talked with a neighbor's wife this weekend and apparently she's one of the looney tunes that thinks the husband killed the kids and staged the suicide attempt. I didn't press her on any details since she's part of the group we hang out with a lot and didn't want to strain any relationships, but apparently some people are far, far more detached from reality than they seem at the surface. I honestly don't understand how someone could even arrive at that conclusion given the fact that she's not disputing she even did it, but I guess that's just the world we live in now.

I know it's an easy boogie man, but I blame social media in particular on this one. Algorithm's and the site you use HEAVILY bias what slant you're getting on it. If you're in your 20s and on Tok Tok you're getting crazy conspiracy theories on the husband. 40+ on Twitter, she's the devil incarnate and the jurors thought completely with their uteruses (even the men). I know that happens to some degree with everything nowadays but this is a particularly stark example.

42 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

now you how we feel when we listen to a trumper.

She is on your side. It's still the same for us just with a new topic.

28 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

She is on your side. It's still the same for us just with a new topic.

2 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

That one came back at ya fast, huh

Listening to a crazy white liberal woman is like listening to a crazy white liberal woman

1 hour ago, we_gotta_believe said:

So when you said, "she's done this before" you weren't referring to strangulation nor death of infants in a maternity ward, but rather something else far more vague that you still can't quite articulate?

The Original Night Stalker used to be the Vidalia Ransacker.