Wow. Those almost look like the redactions in the "Kennedy File". Yes. IMO. It does seem the jurors were asked questions, And did not just give statements. The square looks weird. "Paul Lynde" Center square. I cannot think of a time where I have heard of a "Court Clerk" To watch a defendant's actions. The jury watching, Yes. They do that on their own. And the defendantis advised by their attorneyto remain as stoic as possible. "Jury Tampering" Yeahhhh. I am not yet through the video. As much as I hate it. It does seem IMO. There was interference in some manner. Making the defense's argument stronger. IMO. He will get a new trial. I have noticed the defense always fights for crime scene photos being shown. Even in cases where DNA proves they committed the crime. In those cases, I believe it is important imposing penalty. I could see if there is doubt being argued. Not allowing according to the "Paralegal "Smoke breaks". That appears to me also, To make a decision FAST! Otherwise...OH YES YOU DO!!! I'll even vape DURING deliberations, Mess with me. Some jurors are saying different. So there is conflict in statements. This also is in favor of the defense. Wow. Like I said. The evidence speaks he is guilty. But how stupid to do these things of misconduct, If they did. I don't understand why they felt they needed to. The one juror telling her husband where they were going. DUH! So since I don't know. For an important trial like this. They weren't sequestered?. If a juror didn't hear a comment. You would think they would ask to repeat it. Or after adjournment that day. They all deny they were coerced. Of course they will however. I personally have never heard of a private meeting with just the jury "Foreman". I am more convinced, And not done with this video. That he will get a new trial. Even if there was not misconduct. It is a mess. There is too much conflict of conduct in statements going polar opposites. Such a high profile case, And if you did. I will say even more now. How incredibly stupid. I hate taking the side of the defense. Especially in this case. IMO. He definitely is guilty. I'm usually for the prosecution. Thank you for posting this
@GrandmaBear. That was very good. Unbiased. If it can sway ME for evidence in favor of the defense....