lol sorry wild afternoon and night! We had a bank robbery where the defendant was charged with robbing a bank and a 924c for a gun that he threatened he had in the note. The whole event was: he robbed the bank with a note that said he had a gun. He never brandished it. He gets the money and runs out and in the alley between buildings he runs into a rival gang member. They get in a fight and he pulls the gun out and shoot the dude. Fast forward to trial prep, I pull CCTV footage from the cameras not affiliated with the bank and you can pretty clearly see the pistol bulging in his pants. We also get fbi and atf forensics to separately verify finger prints from the pistol and the magazine AND 2 bullets still in the magazine from the recovered pistol all matched the defendant. Fast forward again to trial: an engineer gets left in the jury panel against my protests. We get a guilty on the robbery because it thankfully wasn’t charged as armed robbery but the 924c gets hung and mistrialed. The jury reason… the engineer was couldn’t agree the concept of circumstantial evidence in practice despite not disagreeing during voir dire. He basically said that without seeing him brandish, hold or own the firearm prior to the alley murder, he couldn’t deduce that the guy did infact have pessessionnif a firearm during the robbery. And that his fingerprints on any ammo and the firearm could have been solely from the murder. Now on its face it isn’t a bad argument but all 11 other jurors were adamantly in opposition to his work (which he had also done a complete flow chart on the white board in the jury room) It was wild, the jury was pissed, we were pissed. I had since added the whole “does anyone watch CSI and expect to have fingerprinting or dna analysis on every piece of evidence?” To our questioning. [emoji1787]