'Jury Booty' and Anti-prosecution tactics. (Was Re:)

[Bill Stewart]

At 05:02 PM 1/12/2014, Jim Bell wrote:

>... Authorities, no doubt, would want to label this 'jury 
>tampering'.   <http:///>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_tampering 
>  However, it is likely that if no actual 'offer' is made to a 
>specific juror, and  'everybody' simply KNOWS that these payments 
>will occur (due to prior advertising and other publicity, and 
>because other jurors have always been paid in the past), this should 
>not run afoul of such laws.

Of *course* they'd want to label it 'jury tampering', because it *is* 
jury tampering.
It's an offer to bribe the jurors to acquit somebody they might 
otherwise convict.
It directly runs afoul of jury tampering laws, and the only difference from
traditional jury tampering is that it *might* be easier not to get caught.

I do prefer it to some other traditional kinds of jury tampering,
including the one where the government only allows prosecution-friendly jurors,
and the one where the payment for acquittal is "not getting your legs broken".
(The latter, btw, also has some anonymity built into the payment mechanism,
since it's easy to deliver the payment anonymously to jurors who accept.)
But they're all perversions of justice.