American juries intimidate jury members for convictions
9-11 certainly has brought some stupidity to Americans.
In situations where the government has "an interest" in getting a conviction, there's considerable pressure on jury members to convict.
Even if there's no actual crime.
There are three essential elements to show entrapment: Willingness, readiness, and ability.
Unfortunately, in cases where the government can't show anything, they'll simply use the "Post 9-11 era" as the reason to trump up the charges.
In many cases, the governments reported "terrorist convictions" are overstated by 30-times.
Are you feeling safer?
One of the ideas of the American jury system is that the jury will review the evidence and come to a reasonable conclusions.
But it is disturbing to hear that jury members will actively intimidate other jury members to arrive at the desired result.
Allegedly, in order to win convictions, jury Members allegedly threatened to bring harm to one of the jury members.
The lone juror said the evidence didn't stack up. From what they had heard, the evidence clearly showed the defendant had not actual capability.
The only reason they were held liable for the crime was that the government informant lied about the initial scope of the defendants capabilities; and then the government actively engaged with others to facilitate the transfers.
American justice has not bee served. This is no different than the sham courts Saddam used.