No one can predict a criminal jury verdict with anything approaching scientific accuracy. This includes lawyers, judges, and, most certainly, political commentators.

This is the mystery of the truth-divination system we call a criminal justice system. We let two white knights (the presumption of innocence clothes both prosecution and defense in white) joust and whoever wins is determined to be representing the side of truth. Juries decide which side wins.

After the Trump trial verdict, we will never know exactly what factored into the jury’s decision—whether it be conviction, acquittal or hung jury—because no one account can capture even how one human mind makes decisions, much less twelve of them.

But here’s what to watch for.

The prosecution bears the burden of proof and in some jurisdictions that means they go first and last—meaning the prosecution gets to rebut the defense. However, in New York, the defense goes first and then the prosecution—no rebuttal. Then judge Juan Merchan will instruct the jury on the law before giving them the case to decide.

The best defense closings are not scattergun approaches that rely upon lofty rhetoric or anecdotes about the meaning of reasonable doubt. Nor do they talk much about the prosecution bearing the burden of proof and the fact that a defendant is presumed innocent. The reality is defendants tend to face a “presumed guilty” attitude that the defense must overcome. To do so, defense counsel needs to present a coherent theory or theories. For example, the defendant wasn’t present at the crime scene and the eyewitnesses are suspect because they either have bad eyesight or are biased against the defendant.........

© The Daily Beast