Democrats may be on the verge of discovering what happens when justice is really served. For the past several days they have been squawking about the president’s and AG’s interference in the sentencing of Trump confidante Roger Stone. But now, much to their chagrin, Roger Stone may get a new trial. And Tomeka Hart, the jury foreperson in the trial, may be looking at jail time.
Former Judge Andrew Napolitano was a guest on Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight” where he laid out the scenario that may now play out in light of new facts that have emerged. Among these are that Hart, who swore under oath during voir dire that she hadn’t paid “close attention” to the Russia investigation and that Stone’s affiliation with President Donald Trump would “absolutely not” color her views of the Stone, appears to have lied. A tweet by Hart from 2017 in which refers to Trump as the #KlanPresident has surfaced.
"Quick question for the #KlanPresident and the 64% of Republicans who agree with his remarks and behavior over… https://t.co/HSObN7kZbL
— Tomeka Hart (@hartformemphis) August 19, 2017
Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?
So has the information that she ran for Congress as a Democrat in 2012. These and other potential indicators of bias suggest Hart was something other than a disinterested observer, as she let on during the jury selection.
So what could and should happen next? Here is Napolitano:
The chief takeaway from the interview is that, in Napolitano’s opinion, Stone is “absolutely entitled to a new trial.”
It is the duty of the judge to ensure that both the government and defendant get a fair trial and if the judge discovers afterward that there was a built-in inherent bias on the part of a member of a jury against the defendant, that is an automatic trigger for a new trial.
Judge Amy Berman Jackson, he added, is “going to have to call those jurors back in and interrogate them or make a decision on the spot.”
And what would happen to Hart?
It would be catastrophic for her. First of all, she is a lawyer. So she would be prosecuted for perjury since the statements are given under oath and if convicted she would lose her license to practice law but that would be the least of her concerns. She probably would serve jail time if she lied in order to affect the outcome of a case and if she did lie, if a judge concluded she lied, Tucker, that is an automatic vacation of the conviction and in order for a new trial if the government even wants to try Stone a second time.
The Democrats should study this case hard. It may help them get a sense of what a real “smoking gun” and miscarriage of justice look like.
