Below is my column in The Hill on the start of the Hunter Biden trial and the elements of a classic jury nullification strategy by the defense. It is not clear that it will work in an otherwise open-and-shut case, but it might. What is clear is that it may be all that Biden has short of the Rapture.
Here is the column:
There was an interesting development this week in the Hunter Biden gun trial: the fact that there will indeed be a Hunter Biden gun trial.
That development is surprising only because there do not appear to be any facts in dispute in this case. And the primary witness against Hunter Biden will be Hunter Biden himself.
The sole issue in this case is whether Biden filed a false gun form (ATF Form 4473) in which, as a condition for his purchase of a .38-caliber Colt Cobra revolver from the StarQuest Shooters and Survival Supply in Wilmington, Del., he stated that he was not a user of drugs.
Biden’s counsel, Abbe Lowell, previously suggested that his client may have had a window of sobriety when he signed the form, but then returned to his addiction afterward. But then Hunter himself blew that theory away with his public comments and books. Lowell then suggested in court that someone else may have checked the box on the form.
In the interim, Lowell has brought a litany of challenges. At one point, he claimed that the government must fulfill a prior dead plea agreement. At another, he adopted an argument of the National Rifle Association challenging the underlying statute.
The defense also failed this week to call a last-minute witness who would testify that Hunter may not have known that he was an addict. The defense was accused of essentially hiding the ball with the expert’s expected testimony so Judge Maryellen Noreika barred the appearance of the Columbia professor.
Yet, again, Hunter Biden himself would have destroyed the defense. The form asks if Hunter was a user of drugs, not just an addict: “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”
Hunter wrote how he was a user of a wide array of drugs for years. It is hard to imagine he thought himself as clean as a clergyman in Wilmington in 2018.
So why wouldn’t Hunter just plead guilty? Even without his earlier plea deal, a guilty plea could significantly reinforce a request to avoid jail time in the case. It would also avoid an embarrassing trial for himself and his father during a presidential election.
While Hunter could always throw in the towel before the start of testimony, there is currently no discernible strategy beyond hoping that a pending case in the Supreme Court might undermine the indictment.
There may also be another possible strategy in play: jury nullification.
Unlike Donald Trump in Manhattan, Delaware is Biden country. The chance that he will get strong supporters of his father on the jury is an almost statistical certainty. In 2020, Joe Biden received roughly 60 percent of the vote over Donald Trump in the state. Having first lady Jill Biden, who is extremely popular, at the trial will only reinforce the connection.
In addition to a favorable jury pool, Biden may be hoping that testimony on his travails with drugs will prompt one or more jurors to ignore the law and vote to acquit. Notably, virtually all of the selected jurors have said that they know of someone who has struggled with drugs.
Indeed, Judge Noreika already appears to suspect such a strategy. Noreika rejected the effort of the defense to introduce an altered version of the federal firearms form created by the gun store employees. They argue that the alteration showed a political bias on the part of the prosecutors. The court found the document “irrelevant” and chastised the defense team for pursuing “conspiratorial” theories and an effort to confuse or mislead the jury.
She noted that the use of the altered form would be “unduly prejudicial and invites (jury) nullification.”
Jury nullification arguments have long been banned or discouraged in many courtrooms. Nevertheless, jury nullification has its advocates. For example, Georgetown Law Professor Paul Butler has called for Black jurors to refuse to convict Black defendants of drug crimes. Butler has said that “my goal is the subversion of the present criminal justice system.”
Hunter Biden is obviously not the primary concern of Professor Butler in the impact of drug prosecutions on the Black community. However, he has also argued that “jury nullification is just part of an arsenal of tools to end the failed “war on drugs.”
Biden’s case has all of the characteristics of a nullification defense. Even if he cannot secure acquittal, the combination of political and social elements at play in Delaware could produce a hung jury.
Trying a Biden in Delaware is a challenge for any prosecutor, even without the potential sympathies for a reformed drug addict. With the first lady sitting behind him, the family ties will be on full display. There is an understandable parental desire to show emotional support for Hunter, but prosecutors cannot be thrilled by the potential effect on jurors in the pro-Biden state.
Wilmington is President Biden’s hometown, where he still maintains a family residence. In Wilmington itself in 2020, Biden received 26,698 votes to Trump’s 3,580.
The hope is that, as President Biden once said, “Delaware is about getting everyone in the room, no matter how tough the problem, no matter how big the disagreement, and staying in the room until we figure it out.” Most everyone is in the courtroom and the hope is that at least some of these jurors will “figure it out” in their favor.
Perhaps Hunter put it best: “The single best thing is, family comes first. Over everything. I can’t think of anything that has been more pervasive and played a larger part in my life than that simple lesson.”
The defense may be hoping that, for some jurors, “family [will] come first … over everything,” particularly over the evidence.
Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.
For many, this will be the illusion of finally bringing the Biden’s to justice for everything they have allegedly done. A guilty verdict or not, those same people will believe the Biden’s have nothing more to account for.
This all just theater, complete with Hunter seemingly hostile towards the prosecutor and the Mom showing up to complete the illusion of seriousness.
There is no way there will be a conviction here. The DOJ is obviously not trying, the jury pool knows all about the political implications of a conviction and won’t do it. Most likely is a hung jury, but you can’t rule out an outright acquittal, an exceedingly rare occurrence in federal criminal prosecutions that probably happen only when the DOJ doesn’t care to convict. As here.
Hunter Biden and Abbe Lowell are absolute scum. The lawsuits regarding the laptop are a joke, and if I were the judge in these particular cases, Abbe Lowell would spend some time in the can.
I hope Hunter is maxed the f out.
Why is Jill there? She is not his mother.
Russ
Russ, my view is she is there to intimidate the jury by reminding them where they live. Bidenville.
You are a perfect example of the brain pollution brought about by MAGA media. You didn’t even know that Jill is Hunter’s adoptive mother, and ASSUME some nefarious motivation for her being there. Your comment about attempting to unfairly influence the jury had to have come straight from one of the MAGA media–which one was it? I’d like to know. Even if she hadn’t adopted him, he would have been her step-son and the son of her husband, so why shouldn’t she be there? Unlike the Trumps, the Bidens truly love and support one another. Hunter’s sister and wife were there, too.
Jill Biden ADOPTED Hunter and Beau–at their request after she and Joe were married.
If it is crooked, corrupt, sleazy, or underhanded, then yes, it would be the path of any democrat prog.
“Is Hunter Biden Pursuing a Jury Nullification Strategy?”
He’d be a fool if he didn’t. This is his best opportunity for a two word verdict.
Jury nullification has been practiced by defense counsel for over a hundred years. It was used during the time of slavery to prevent incarceration of abolitionists who refused to return runaway slaves. A jury is entitled to decide that a prosecution is unfair or unfairly applied in a given case, and is not required to rotely rule “guilty” if they believe that doing so would be unjust, contrary to the message Turley is trying to send.
Gigi, making nonsense whatsoever.
Can we get an interpreter in here?
Oh, i get it, she just had to disagree with Turley somehow, even if she didnt.
Here’s a question a jury could consider. Should an alcoholic be able to legally purchase a gun? Alcoholism is an addiction. Clearly an intoxicated individual would not be sold a gun in the store. But, when that individual is sober he can legally purchase a gun. How is this any different than Hunter Biden purchasing a gun while being sober at the time of the sale?
A Marijuana user can legally purchase a gun anytime while sober. This case is not as open and shut as the professor seems to think. The law prohibiting ownership because one is an addict has already been ruled unconstitutional. So the charge of lying on the form becomes irrelevant.
“The law prohibiting ownership because one is an addict has already been ruled unconstitutional.”
A lie and irrelevant. This isnt about ownership. If Hunter had purchased a gun from me, he wouldnt be on trial right now.
As for alcohol
A number of states and the District of Columbia restrict firearm access by individuals grappling with alcohol addiction and misuse disorders.
Since you are too dumb to connect the dots, the federal prohibition on gun access was about criminals. Felons, domestic abuse, etc. Alcohol use is not criminal. Drug use is. Get it now?
Much more stupidity in your post, but i dont have the time or patience right now.
Suffice it to say you are going to make an even bigger fool of yourself today than yesterday, if you keep commenting on this topic of which you obviously have zero knowledge.
Waters,
Purchasing a gun is seeking ownership. The 2nd amendment applies. He has a right to bear arms even as an addict according to the 5th circuit. He was not high or intoxicated when he bought the gun. The 5th circuit ruled,
“In short, our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage. Nor do more generalized traditions of disarming dangerous persons support this restriction on nonviolent drug users. As applied to Daniels, then, § 922(g)(3) violates the Second Amendment. We reverse the judgment of conviction and render a dismissal of the indictment,”
The point is being an addict does not prevent someone from buying a gun.
“ Felons, domestic abuse, etc. Alcohol use is not criminal. Drug use is. Get it now?”
You don’t get it. Felons are not prohibited from purchasing a gun, even domestic abusers. Addiction is not a crime. Drug use is not a crime. POSSESSION of illegal drugs is a crime. You’re arguing that the act of drinking is a crime because drug USE is a crime. That’s pretty stupid. He’s being charged for lying on the form because being an addict and user of illegal drugs is what makes it illegal to purchase or own a gun. Problem is the 5th circuit and the Bruen ruling make it clear that just being. An addict is not a prohibition on the right to bear arms.
You’re not paying attention. Addiction is not a crime. Just as alcoholism is not a crime. You can’t buy a gun while under the influence, but you can buy one when you’re sober. You can be a drug user and legally purchase a gun while sober. The statute that makes the purchase and ownership of a firearm because you’re an addict or a non-violent felon has been ruled unconstitutional.
https://thefirearmfirm.com/non-violent-felons-cannot-be-denied-their-2nd-amendment-rights/amp/
So in light of many recent rulings on gun rights. Felons, the non-violent kind and out of prison, can purchase and own a gun, so can those charged with domestic abuse. Hunter Biden stands a good chance of being acquitted because the statute making it illegal for him to buy a gun is unconstitutional. So the charge of lying on the form becomes pointless.
“You’re arguing that the act of drinking is a crime because drug USE is a crime.”
No, your interpretation of what i said is what is STUPID.
Reading comprehension. Work on it.
As applied to Daniels,
A clue for you, oh clueless one.
Best thing to do is just ignore misguided ‘George’.
He comes here to get attention and repeat Dem talking points.
His comments show he doesn’t care about real justice or the truth.
I think i figured it out. This is truly getting sad.
At the end of his lies yesterday, as he so often does, Joe refused to take any questions. Instead, he stood there with a series of odd looks on his face as reporters shouted questions. After several seconds, he walked away. This was oddly reminiscent of a few days ago, when he turned back and smiled when asked about the Trump conviction.
Joe is trying his best to remember what the clever retort was that his staff gave him to say that day. Stuff like “did you bump your head” or “i wish i was that powerful”.
You can see him yesterday, open his mouth and start to mutter something. He just cant get it out. Twice. Then he gives up and walks away.
Maybe they should put it on a cue card.
Sorry, replace the word “refused” above, with the words “was not allowed”.
It seems professor Turley did not learn his lesson regarding case predictions when the trial has barely started. It’s evidence he is either being obtuse or he’s woefully misinformed about the facts of the case.
“ The sole issue in this case is whether Biden filed a false gun form (ATF Form 4473) in which, as a condition for his purchase of a .38-caliber Colt Cobra revolver from the StarQuest Shooters and Survival Supply in Wilmington, Del., he stated that he was not a user of drugs.”
There’s a problem with that. Abbe Lowell introduced evidence that the original application was altered by the gun store employee and that it was the employee who filled out the form. It’s reported the employee who handled the sale was eager to make a sale quickly and get Hunter out of there as quickly as possible because he knew who he was. The original application allegedly shows evidence that information was added after the sale.
There’s also an issue of evidence purported to show cocaine on a table that turns out to be saw dust.
Cross examination of the prosecution’s witnesses has not occurred yet and Turley is already talking about Jury nullification as if it’s already a done deal.
In addition, Hunter Biden still has the Supreme Court Bruen ruling on his side in addition to the 5th circuit ruling that a drug users can not be barred from owning guns. The professor left out this ruling specifically because the statute barring Hunter from purchasing a gun because he’s an addict is unconstitutional.
“ Our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage,” the three-judge panel for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans wrote“
Hunter Biden may benefit from this ruling on appeal if he is found guilty in this case. It stands a good chance of being overturned IF he is convicted. But there’s still a lot of cross examination and the trial has barely started.
So much crap in this one post its hard to know where to start. How about this.
What prediction in the Trump trial are you referring to? Please cut and paste here the exact quote from Turley.
We’ll go from there at cutting up your nonsense again.
By the way, we are still waiting for the definitions of “willful denial” and “convicted felon”.
Waters,
https://jonathanturley.org/2024/05/17/getting-played-the-demolition-of-cohen-on-cross-examination-reveals-the-grift-to-a-new-york-jury/#more-219046
Turley was making a lot of predictions and conclusions that clearly blew up in his face. He chose to make these declarative statements when the trial barely started. Today, he’s doing it again.
As i said, cut and paste the ONE(s) you are referring to, Gigi.
The last one i remember is that he predicted a conviction, with a small possibility of a hung jury.
You wont because you cant.
Do it, or you’re a liar. Again
You seem to refer to posts he made before the trial began, yet in your link Turley says, and i quote:
As the trial of former President Donald Trump careens toward its conclusion…
Stop being a douchebag. Bring the goods or STFU with your feelings and false accusations.
Waters, I’m not Gigi. You seem very confused.
I gave you the whole article. Perhaps you should read all of it instead of just relying on the first few sentences.
Anonymous has a good question about the weapon Hunter is charged with illegally buying and the semiautomatic seen in the laptop. They are totally different weapons. Was the semi-automatic his real weapon and the revolver, usually light weight in this case, just a second weapon like police and others will place on the leg as a backup. Or did he lose the semiautomatic (no comments on where it is. Obviously not stored properly:sic)Strange weapon to have as a primary with a short barrel and questionable accuracy and only 6 shots. You don’t need a Desert Eagle 50 cal for a handgun but you can certainly get a 9 mm, single stack semiautomatic handguns with at least 9 shots and rapid reload of a magazine and better accuracy as well as lightweight. Of course he was drug addled so one never knows. He was, for a time, in the military, before being kicked out so he should have been familiar with a 9 mm semiautomatic. You would think he would buy something he was familiar with.
I’m not familiar with the date/time stamp on that pic, but it might be safe to assume that Hunter obtained that semi after the revolver was lost.
As for a carry weapon, it really depends on the expected circumstance for deployment and how you choose to carry it. If the intended use is just to get an attacker off of you, if you need 13 shots, you probably shouldnt carry a weapon. If you are dealing with drug dealers and other nefarious types, more firepower is recommended. If you waistband carry, u want something smaller. If you have a backpack for your crack and cash with you all the time, go big or go home.
Been trying to identify the Make of the Hunters semi-auto.
It has a sharp finger guard and a hammer so it may be a double action semi-auto.
The Slide’s back is curved and it has an odd stainless pin on the barrel end of the lower receiver.
Identify:
https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/10/biden-gun-1.jpg?resize=577,1024&quality=75&strip=all
A Quarter-Pounder with Cheese Combo reward for anybody that identifies it!
I have also seen another HB-Laptop photo of HB with Beretta Open Top Slide 92R variant. (I think it’s been scrubbed)
Judging by the Photo and the holding angle of Hunter’s grip, the sharp tit on the trigger guard, the slide’s back tapper and open top, the hole in the hammer, barrel length, [the stainless pin on the barrel end of the frame – no clue?], I’d say its a:
Taurus 917C (maybe an older variant of this)
https://www.taurususa.com/pistols/taurus-92/taurus-917c-9mm-18rds-black
Barrel Length – 4.30 In.
Taurus PT-92/99 Series
https://www.taurususa.com/pistols/taurus-92
He would have definitely paid under $500 if he bought it legit.
Had it been anyone else not named Biden, they would of been charged, convicted and already serving time.
Had it been anyone else the sale would have been made without an issue. Lying on forms is rarely prosecuted. How may gun stores fill out the forms for the purchaser as a “convenience”? There are unscrupulous gun stores out there who prioritize a sale more than the “red tape”.
Once I learned that the jury was mostly composed of those who know addicts and one had a DUI, I knew a guilty man would walk.
@suzy1951 RE: Once I learned that the jury”…….’Delaware citizens are selected and summoned for jury duty on a random basis. The pool of candidates is pulled from what is called the Federal Source List. This list includes citizens who have registered to vote, those who have obtained a Delaware Vehicle Operator’s License and individuals who are issued a State Identification Card.” Given the aforementioned, copied from the ‘Delaware Courts-Judicial Branch’ web page, one wonders how the cast of characters with such similar traits was assembled for a jury pool culled by what is purported to be a random selection process.
Hunter will get exactly what Hillary got.
Pull out the lawyer jokes; in many cases they are well deserved.
……..right out of ‘The Godfather’!!
If the corrupt, spawn gets off then I guess dems don’t care if addicts have guns.
“… So why wouldn’t Hunter just plead guilty? Even without his earlier plea deal, a guilty plea could significantly reinforce a request to avoid jail time in the case. …”
Two Words = “Billable Hours” This Kid has been a Cash Cow for Abbe Lowell. Some how I get the feeling that the Tax Payers are paying for this Show-N-Tell.
Is Kevin Morris in the Courtroom? (More Billable Hours) or is he in CIA protective custody at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp?
Laptop from Hell Photos, with Hunter sporting semi automatic handguns (BTW: the ‘semi auto’ photos have been scrubbed from the Net – Who done that?) – the World will never know.
https://9xplayer.com/?url=https://www.insideedition.com/media/videos/unearthed-images-show-hunter-biden-brandishing-handgun-77324&downloadButton=false&darkMode=false
F.Y.I.:
A ‘ .38-caliber Colt Cobra revolver ” mentioned in the charges,
is a completely different Hand Gun compared to the semi automatic handgun with Hunter in the Laptop photos.
Was the semi automatic pistol an ‘illegal street gun” ? (No paper trail)
Where is it now?
and Where was Secret Service when all this happened?
5 Months to go! 👨💼 Trump 🦅 | 🥴 Biden 😵
Today is June 5th-> July(①)-> August(②)-> September(③)-> October(④)-> November(⑤) Tuesday 5th-> 2024 | Election Day 🇺🇸
so one is above the law
except in Delaware?
Is Hunter Biden’s strategy, “jury nullification?”
“When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then what remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” ― Arthur Conan Doyle, The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes