再说说梁案如何上诉

来源: rubikscube 于 2016-02-18 11:39:03 [档案] [博客] [旧帖] [给我悄悄话] 本文已被阅读：次 (1951 bytes)

1）对于陪审员认为梁撒谎这个结果，连最高法院的大法官都改不了。认栽吧。

Credibility of the witness is judged by the jury, not the judge or the opposing parties.

A juror is a trier of facts. As judges of the facts, you alone determine the truthfulness and accuracy of the testimony of each witness. You must decide whether a witness told the truth and was accurate, or instead, testified falsely or was mistaken. You must also decide what importance to give to the testimony you accept as truthful and accurate. It is the quality of the testimony that is controlling, not the number of witnesses who testify.

2）无人能质疑陪审团判决的合法性，除非有确凿证据证明外界不良影响。

你们见过哪个陪审员被起诉过？除非他接受外界贿赂，还得证据确凿。

3）证明陪审团或法官或地区检察官歧视也不容易。

要不然你们当中怎么还没有一个自己去告公司和老板，而且成功了的范例呢。最重要的一条是证明 discriminatory intent （蓄意歧视），即：either someone expressly said something along the line of "I did this because I want to discriminate against you" or nothing else but discrimination can explain the discrimintory impact。梁所犯错误这么多，随便找一个理由就驳斥了“只是因为歧视”。

4）可能有戏的，就是陪审员验枪一事。

庭审中，陪审员要求检验实物证据，可以。但该要求经一方提出，另一方一定要反对，并说出反对的法律依据，该“错误”以后才能在判决后作为上诉的依据。后来 deliberations 又验枪了。这回一定要反对。不知道该律师是怎么处理的。