If you're asking - is the fact that they were not present is grounds for an appeal - they had best ask their attorney.
Generally speaking - in and of itself, it would NOT be grounds for an appeal. As long as their attorney was there to participate in Voire DIre (which I'm sure they were) their interests are considered to have been represented.
Scout can tell when a jury has found a defendant guilty if the jury foreman announces the verdict in court in front of everyone present, including the defendant, lawyers, judge, and spectators. The judge will then typically set a date for sentencing.
The Grand Jury is of the opinion, sufficient evidence was present during the grand jury testimony to proceed with a trial of the defendant. This is known as indictment.
It describes the attempt by the defendant (or persons associated with the defendant) to influence the jury sitting on the defendant's trial.
Texas juries are required to reach a unanimous verdict in criminal cases, meaning that all members of the jury must agree on the defendant's guilt or innocence. If the jury is unable to reach a unanimous verdict, it results in a hung jury and the case may be retried.
In a typical courtroom, you will find the judge, the prosecutor, the defense attorney, the defendant, witnesses, the jury (if it's a jury trial), court staff, and spectators.
Your question is unclear. In the USA, a defendant does NOT HAVE TO testify at his trial, ever. The defendant is the one accused of committing the crime. He does not have to say anything (OJ Simpson did NOT testify in his first trial, Scott Peterson did NOT testify at his trial.) The Prosecutor will present his case (with all his evidence and witnesses) explaining to the jury (or judge) WHY the evidence shows the defendant committed the crime. The Defense Attorney will present his case (with all his evidence and witnesses) explaining to the jury (or judge) WHY the evidence does NOT show the defendant committed the crime. The defendant does not have to be one of those witnesses. He cannot be forced to testify.
In a jury trial - by a jury of his peers. If the defendant choses a Bench Trial then he will be judged by the Judge.
Well sure,its to make sure someone is convicted of the crime they are charged with, LMAO,no really,its to provide a fair&impartial jury,so the defendant,gets a fair trial.....
Guilt is determined IF the prosecution can present evidence to convince a jury (or in the case of a non-jury trial, a judge) beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.
The jury does not decide what punishment the defendant gets, the judge does. The only thing the jury decides is whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of what he is accused of.
A double jury is a trail with one defendant and two juries.
A petit jury in a criminal trial decides whether or not a defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The other type of jury, the Grand Jury, decides whether or not there is sufficient evidence to bring charges against a defendant prior to the trial. It does not decide whether or not the defendant is guilty. Therefore the Grand Jury is not bound by the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt.