The government is either going to consent to a retrial because the jury verdict was tainted by potentially perjured testimony or the government is going to have to explain to the court why the prejudiced testimony was harmless -- in other words, that the testimony did not influence the jury's verdict.
There's going to have to be a retrial. This was clearly at some level important testimony. The safest thing to do would be to grant a retrial.
There's going to have to be a retrial.
What will probably happen, is that she'll remain out on bail.
We use cookies to enhance your browsing experience, analyze site traffic, and personalize content. By clicking "Got It!," you consent to our use of cookies.