PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Jurors who are considering whether to convict Ammon Bundy and his followers for their occupation of a wildlife refuge in Oregon have indicated difficulty in reaching a consensus.
Federal prosecutors and attorneys for the seven defendants were reconvened Tuesday afternoon because of two hand-written notes submitted by jurors to the judge.
OPB reports that one note questions the impartiality of one of the jurors. Another note asks whether the jurors need to reach agreement on all seven defendants, or if it can be just three.
Bundy in early 2016 led what turned out to be a 41-day occupation of a national wildlife refuge near Burns, Oregon. He and his co-defendants are charged with conspiring to impede Interior Department employees from doing their duties at the refuge.
Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Email: [email protected]
Twitter @stgnews
Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Wow, the AP story is certainly misleading. The part about a note from one juror concerning the impartiality of another juror will be addressed again tomorrow. So far, the judge is satisfied with the response from the other juror. But the “lack of consensus” part of the story implies too much. All the second note concerned was about the complexities of multiple defendants, each with multiple charges. It in no way implied anything like a hung jury as the article seems to suggest.