All sarcasm aside... I'm confused why Stone asked that the Judge recuse herself or grant a second trial or agree that the lead juror was biased at this point. I mean, there is just 0% chance of that.
So, was it just for show? Or was it to gain evidence to use in the appeals process?
Not sure entirely... judge called for it. I do think you have to dot all your I’s and cross all your t’s. Does call attention to the judges and hurries corrupt and biased behavior.