Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Stuff -- although court martial equivalent of a jury now selected in the deadly Fort Hood shooting case thirteen people were killed as you know back in 2009.
That's when authorities say major Nadal Hasan opened fire at the Texas army base.
The former army psychiatrist said earlier he did it in defense of Taliban leaders.
And someone is defending himself in the court -- set to begin August 6.
Judge entered -- -- -- Fox News senior judicial analyst joins us now with more on that you've.
Supervise trials in which a defendant was defending himself -- Yes -- -- hidden in plain English it's a nightmare it it really is the judge's nightmare and I'll tell you why because you you cannot.
In the presence of the jury be perceived as helping the defendant.
On the other hand you have to make sure that the trial is basically fair and if the defendant is missing an opportunity -- to do something.
The failure to do which might invalidate -- conviction and you end up trying and all over again.
You have to nudge the defendants are going to be very very gently busy gonna put the jury out of the courtroom a lot that's in a major in the value got to ask the question this way.
Are you forgetting this this document or want you to talk to shadow council fancy phrase for the lawyer I'm gonna make sit next to you who you just fired.
So this could take a long time all of -- be a lot of panel in panel I guess -- trial like this we'll take three to four times as long.
As a trial with with lawyers defending the defense.
It's a death penalty case and one of the officers who has been empaneled has expressed reservations with the death penalty apparently this is.
An officer who is a devout southern Baptist instead it's a high mark for me in terms of saying to put someone to death.
That is not uncommon to hear from jurors I have heard that the next question is.
Is it impossible for you to put someone to death and at the person says yes -- on the not qualified to be in any on the jury.
If a person says no it's just a hi mark I would demand the most stringent of evidence guess what that's what the court is gonna tell them to demand so this particular person.
And again major Nadal defending himself allowed him on the jury this particular.
A person with a qualms about the death penalty it is an appropriate juror on a death penalty case in my view.
It has taken for years to bring this case to trial -- the federal government is still calling it a case of workplace violence it's not terrorism.
Is it what about his antics in the courtroom if he gets up and talks about you know defending -- -- and that kind of thing well.
That there are no cameras.
In the military proceeding American no cameras any federal proceeding.
And the jurors though -- the jurors are professional military people I don't think this will resonate with them I think it'll be counterproductive.
And I think they'll be able to overlook it and I think the judge will be able to restrain him when he does it.
It would be unsightly if -- were televised and we were to see that and have to listen to it.
But I don't think it will affect the ultimate outcome of the case the evidence of his guilt is overwhelming.
The elements of -- first degree murder of murder with that -- capital murder with a death penalty are clearly Matt.
It's just a question of presenting it in a fair environment for the jury we'll.
Filter by section