Judge Rejects Roger Stone's Request For A New Trial

The transcript discusses a court filing where Stone seeks a retrial, claiming juror bias due to a juror's employment and prior knowledge of his case. Judge Jackson refutes this, noting the defense never requested to strike the juror and that jurors need not be ignorant of case facts. The transcript also covers the withdrawal of federal prosecutors after the DOJ disagreed with their sentencing recommendation, suggesting a lesser sentence for Stone and leaving the final decision to the court.

Why did Stone argue for a retrial?

• The judge was biased.

• The trial was held in the wrong jurisdiction.

• A juror was an IRS employee and had prior knowledge of the case.

• The evidence was tampered with.

What was the judge's response to the defense's claim about the juror?

• The defense never requested to strike the juror.

• The juror was found guilty of misconduct.

• The juror was dismissed.

• The trial was postponed.

According to the judge, what is not required of a juror?

• To have no prior jury experience.

• To be a resident of the trial location.

• To have a legal background.

• To be completely unaware of the case details.

Why did the federal prosecutors withdraw from Stone's case?

• The DOJ disagreed with their sentencing recommendation.

• They were found to be biased.

• The trial was moved to a different court.

• They were replaced by new prosecutors.

What did the DOJ suggest regarding Stone's sentencing?

• A longer sentence than recommended.

• A lesser sentence than initially recommended.

• The same sentence as recommended.

• No prison time at all.