Menendez Mistrial

After all the speculation that New Jersey Democratic lawmaker Robert Menendez's U.S. Senate seat was in trouble due to his corruption trial, Menendez walked out of the federal courthouse in Newark a free man when the judge declared a mistrial. 

The jurors - one of whom could have been me - decided that Menendez was guilty of no more than helping out a friend,  the friend happening to be a wealthy optometrist, but that Menendez's actions probably weren't illegal.  That's it, and that's all.  No verdict.  So it looks like Menendez will be able to serve out the remainder of his Senate term, which expires in January 2019, and not have to worry about serving a term of a different sort.   

But he might not get another term in the Senate.  Menendez's poll numbers in New Jersey are so low, they almost rival those of Chris Christie.  New Jersey hasn't elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate since 1972, but, given that New Jersey Republicans have won half of the twelve gubernatorial elections since then, don't be surprised if they are competitive against Menendez in the state's 2018 U.S. Senate election.

And I can definitely see outgoing lieutenant governor Kim Guadagno going for Menendez's seat.

Why?  Because just as Christine Todd Whitman's failed Senate bid in 1990 was a dry run for her successful gubernatorial run in 993, Kim Guadagno's failed gubernatorial bid could be a dry run for Menendez's Senate seat.  Republicans who lose elections don't quit running for office until they get elected to something or can't run any more, a tradition started by Harold Stassen.

But of course, November 2018 is a long way off, even as November 2017 comes to a close today.  Menendez (below) has time to get his mojo working again.  A week in politics is a life time and a year in politics is an eternity.  A month ago, people were talking about Menendez being in jeopardy; now they've forgotten about Menendez and started talking about Al Franken being in jeopardy.     

What would I have done had I been on that jury?  I doubt that I could have reached a verdict as well.

Na, Na, Na, Gonna Have a Mistrial!

So what was that all about?

After a two-week trial of Bill Cosby on sexual assault allegations in which the jurors were sequestered and shielded from any news about the case, in which the prosecution was well-prepared an armed for bear, two jurors rendered the jury unable to reach a verdict?  The recollections of Andrea Constand, the woman who brought the charges, were deemed inconsistent by the defense, and Judge Steven O'Neill, when asked by the prosecution to bring forward thirteen witnesses, allowed the prosecution to being forward all but twelve of them.  Of course Andrea Constand had inconsistent memories - after thirteen years,  I would expect her not to remember details clearly, but I'm sure she'd remember the central highlight of her case.  And thirteen witnesses would have backed her up. You call that a fair trial for the prosecution?

Let's not forget that Bill Cosby is not accused of assaulting only a few women, but 59 women - fifty-nine!  And he's made sexual boasts alluding to assault in the past.  What would have convinced those two jurors or anyone else in that group of twelve that he's as guilty as sin?

Montgomery County District Attorney Kevin Steel says he will try the case again.  Good luck finding another suitable jury.