i read this and is concerned about buju's fate...

[Baddaz]

TAMPA, Florida — Jurors in the Buju Banton trial went back deliberating a verdict at 9:50 am Tampa time after Judge Jim Moody answered a query from them.
They wanted to know if a crime had taken place on December 10 when Ian Thomas and James Mac were arrested, in a sting operation.
Moody told them yes, that a crime had been comitted.
"Your job is to decide whether or not Mr Myrie was involved in that crime," Moody told the jurors.
Meanwhile, a supporter of Banton's who visited him in jail last night told the Observer minutes ago that the entertainer was in good spirits.
"His spirit was up. He said he had faith," Donovan Rae, who is here from Los Angeles, said after the jurors returned to the jury room.
Another supporter from Los Angeles asked that fans pray and put their trust in God that the jurors will return a not guilty verdict.
"In every desert of uncertainty there is an oasis of grace and mercy and the truth shall prevail," said Laura Owens.

[Sickko]

Same thing i saw and thought Baddaz

[Time]

Since a crime was committed then the firearm charge could stick. You are in illegal possession of a firearm that is carried by another person if that person commits a crime and you were party to the crime.

[Gamma]

i understand the concern and to be honest, seeing that the co-accused have already accepted a plea bargain, the question seems redundant to me because if no crime had been committed there would be no trial and no defendants including buju.

so the concern is that they seemed to be focusing on the wrong issue, their issue is simply whether there is evidence to show beyond a reasonable doubt that buju was not entrapped and was a willing participant who either INITIATED the deal or took part in it. they MUST deal with the entrapment issue as it is an exculpatory defence.

[Gamma]

but if he was entrapped .......then although there is a crime how can he be a party to the crime? that a crime was committed is beyond doubt, 2 persons have accepted a plea deal!!!

[Baddaz]

so the concern is that they seemed to be focusing on the wrong issue, their issue is simply whether there is evidence to show beyond a reasonable doubt that buju was not entrapped and was a willing participant who either INITIATED the deal or took part in it.

yes sir... precisely my concern...

[Twan]

..feel like the jury is confused, if they have to seek clarification for that question...as its obvious that a crime was committed.

[Gamma]

there is one other remote possibility, although the co-accused accepted a plea, they probably want to know if the informant is guilty of a crime EVEN IF BUJU isnt ..... or whether there is only a crime if buju is convicted.

still kinda misplaced but....

[Baddaz]

it seems as if they have either thrown out or forgotten about the judge's summary instructions... questions about areas that should be immaterial to buju's entrappment defense concerns me...

[Assasin]

a good thing you never hear the good Professor Rowe. He said there is more than enough evidence to convict Buju. Cliff Hughes say to him "you know you maybe a hated man in Ja now"? and the professor went on to say what he thought was the evidence.

[Baddaz]

i've heard this rowe has been very critical of buju's defense in general...

[Exile]

I was about to say the same thing...lol.

[myYout]

Given di evidence mi nuh know how him arrive deh suh, none nuh deh deh inna my opinion. Him hab anodah motive fi him conclusion a bet yuh.

[Assasin]

Brethren this is suppose to be the expert. The only chance he gave Buju is by saying "really you can't judge the jury since it take 14 to decide".

Yeah Baddaz he was critical of the Buju team until the high profile lawyer came aboard.

[Gamma]

sour grapes maybe cause him neva get di werk? him probably would a want buju fi plea bargain.....