From The Other Side...Being A Juror

[KharmaTrain]

In light of what I saw this afternoon about the Jackson case, it brought back something that happened to me in 2000. I had the pleasure of serving on a jury in a federal case. Just like many, many others, I dreaded getting called for jury duty, but figured I could use a couple days away and wanted to see what the system was all about.

After sitting around and hoping I wouldn't get "the call", so I could go home, my number was called and I ended up being interviewed to be part of a trial involving straw gun buyers. I figured all I had to do was say I was anti-gun and there wouldn't be a defense lawyer who'd want me on that jury. My ticket to getting done with jury duty was clear. Well almost.

To my surprise, I was called back and told I was on the jury. It was the beginning of two very interesting weeks. Briefly, the case involved local prosecutors attempting to shut down gun stores along across the city limits of Chicago. They set up a sting in attempts to show that these gun store operators were selling guns, illegally, to anyone. Three stings were set up at this particular store, videotaped and the case was around the way the store operator acted on those tapes.

As I stated above, I was, and remain, very pro gun control...and through the testimony I was blown away just how cheap and easy it is for anyone to buy a powerful gun. At the outset, I looked at the defendent and said to myself that he'll dread his lawyer having put me on this jury. Again, this is at the outset, things would change.

There's no way to explain the jury process better than meeting your fellow jurors. The group I was with came from many backgrounds (Cook County) and from upwards of 75 miles around. It truly was a diverse group. Over the next days, we'd find out similar interests and a group dynamic began to set in. While no one discussed the case, you could see that everyone was very involved with the case and each was taking it in at their own pace. The judge encouraged us NOT to take notes and just take in the testimony as it came. I'm sure he knew this couldn't be 14 weeks, and he explained that taking notes took you away from watching all the testimony...judging the witness in full. That was helpful as well.

While I didn't discuss the case with anyone (OK, I'd give the highlights to my wife...so shoot me) I started to see how my opinions about this case were changing...and not to be based on my political beliefs. I was started to get very acquainted with the law and the germaine facts of the case...and if the defendent had violated federal laws. Most important, it began to dawn on me that someone's life was riding on what I was thinking. While we've all had that "I'd hang 'em" thoughts when we see a trial from a distance, there's a totally different feeling when you know this is the real thing.

After two weeks of testimony, we were handed the case. Being sequestered is strange in its own right. Our cellphones were confiscated and I was expecting Maxwell Smart's Cone of Silence to descend from the ceiling. Over the weeks, many of us had become friendly with other jurors...many would go on shopping sprees or check out restaurants...but now the dynamic changed.

We sat down and looked at the book with the charges. Each count had to be voted on. Each was based solely on the charges and the law it allegedly violates. With the evidence and the testimony, I saw that others were starting to detach their opinions just like I had.

The biggest hurdle was the first vote, as this would be the one that would "dovetail" into the others. If he was found not guilt of this charge, other charges wouldn't apply. The case utimately didn't hinge on the gun shop owner (who did all the paperwork almost to the point of tedium) but in how the laws were written and enforced. Yes, the NRA has a point here, they just don't understand it. While shady and slimy, based on the "letter of the law" and under the burden of "beyond any reasonable doubt", all of us voted to acquit the gun shop owner of all the charges.

Yes, a gun dealer walked free, but he didn't break any laws. When you got to see those laws and statues, you saw all the loopholes and that's what made you go hmmmm. In fact, several of the jurors held a conference with the prosecutors and a local news reporter afterwards to say how appauled they were at the vague and archane laws and how this was a bigger problem than some little gun dealer.

To those in a huff about the Jacko verdict today, I'd suggest you take up the next offer to serve on a jury. Or, go down to your local courthouse and sit in on a case...start to finish. Yep, boring as watching paint dry, but fascinating as well.

My hats are off to the jurors and my faith was restored in the jury system. This was justice done, justice served.

[crispini]

1. Wow. A well written, thoughtful post.

Applause! And, nominated!

[KharmaTrain]

5. Thank-You So Kindly

I usually don't start threads around here anymore, but seeing all the fun people were having, I had to take my shot.

I'm delighted to see the egg all over the corporate media's face this afternoon. They had this guy signed, sealed and convicted and had to shift gears. This by no means means I think Jacko's some outstanding citizen...and honestly, I don't care. That's what the jury was for...and they did their job.

Cheers!

[oldtime dfl_er]

2. Jury duty really was an eye-opener to me too

It's very different from how it's portrayed on tv, and yes, there can be horribly boring dead time, while you're waiting in the jury room for the lawyers to hash something out, during boring testimony, etc. but on the whole it's an amazing experience. You get thrown in with 11 strangers and are charged with judging the behavior and fate of a fellow citizen. Even though in the jury I was on there was one woman who was a complete idiot, I found that everyone took their duty seriously. It was a great experience, and no one should try to "get out of it".

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby.24202078

[jbnow]

11. I didn't find jury duty a "great experience" but

it was eye opening.
I thought I'd get off because the defense didn't want young women, the prosecutors didn't like people with a psychology background and I was both. But they had used up most of their dismissal without causes and I was a compromise.

What a heavy burden. A young guy on the jury really panicked, he did not want to deal with it. He cried. The rest of us didn't go that far but...

The case I sat on was home invasion and sexual insult, no DNA evidence.The defendant and victim were strangers of different races. You realize a trial is not a presentation of truth, but both sides spinning for their own case. You try to sort through conflicting testimony...

And you don't want to release a rapist or to convict an innocent man. In the end we convicted. We were told to wait after the verdict and then called back in. We were told then that he'd just been released from prison for the same offense and was being charged as a repeat offender. He pleaded guilty to that or we'd have had to hear that case. And it was a relief...made us feel we had convicted correctly. Not all jurors get that. He got 60 years.

This was years ago but you never consider trials the same way after that.
As far as the Jackson case...I hope he really was innocent. I did not pay much attention during the trial (except via Oberman). I know they were able to bring up past similar actions...but even if they believed Jackson is a molester I know they had to prove it for THIS offense. I just hope the kid was making it up as badly as that would reflect on his life, because I hate the idea he was molested and went through this and then has to see him walk.

[SlipperySlope]

3. Pro-gunners would agree

Many of our existing gun laws are poorly written and poorly enforced. A rewrite of our current laws, that didn't change the underlying intent, would probably be a boon to both sides of this debate.

[KharmaTrain]

6. Try This One...

According to the law, I forget if it was state or federal (there were mixed charges here), you could give up to one gun a year to someone as a gift without having to report its whereabouts. Think of how many guns can vanish just through that loophole.

Then there's the conflict between the state and federal. Most people fail to realize that gun control laws and your ID card is regulated by the state. The federal government isn't notified unless you several guns...thus someone could go to a dozen gun stores, buy a dozen guns, every day for a week and the feds would never have to be nofified.

Again, that's just one side of this. The other side was the commercialization of the gun trade. How easy it is for virtually anyone with $100 to buy a gun and the culture that has developed around living and dying by it. But that's for another thread.

Cheers and thank you!

[Ariana Celeste]

4. Awesome post,

thanks for sharing with us!

It's easy to shout your opinions when you are just sitting back and watching the MSM highlights.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. Thank you for your very fine analysis -- you're absolutely right.

I'm a former trial lawyer, and I gotta tell you, unless you are actually there, in the courtroom for the entire trial, hearing all the evidence, watching and listening to the witnesses, and thinking carefully about the judge's instructions, you are in no position to second-guess any jury. Sometimes juries are wrong, but mostly they do the right thing. I think MJ is a weirdo, but I don't know if he actually molested that kid. The thing is, in a criminal trial the state has to prove all elements of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt, and that's a really tough burden of proof. You can't convict just because the defendant looks like a perv, or is weird, or because you tend to think he's *probably* guilty. Seems to me this jury did its job; if the state's case was weak and they couldn't sustain that very difficult burden of proof, the jury had no choice but to acquit him. If I were on trial I'd hope for the same consideration. Any other way of doing things takes us down a very slippery slope -- all the way to Gitmo.

[Booster]

8. Great post. I have done jury duty about 8 times, ranging from

stupid stuff to 3 murder cases. You're right; anyone saying the jury is stupid has probably never served on a jury, and I wish everyone would a couple of times. Everything isn't so black and white when you have someone's actual life in your hands, and there is that gnawing feeling that just maybe he didn't do it. Then when you get the jury instructions, everything you thought you knew for sure is shot down by those instructions. Try it, folks. I'm scheduled to go again in Aug and I will flat out refuse to do a murder case - just too much involved in those.

[KharmaTrain]

10. 3 Murder Cases? Whoa

I don't know if I could handle one. That's a big load to have...even if it's something that's "cut and dried". But then I also felt very satisfied with my choices in this case. I know they were based on the law, and reinforced by others in that jury who came from different backgrounds but saw the same thing.

Let's say I wouldn't want to be a regular at the Federal Building, but if my number came up again, I'd serve...and I encourage others who are called to do the same thing. It's not what you see on "The Peoples Court".

Cheers!

[Inland]

9. Hey, I remember that case.

eom.

[Missy Vixen]

12. I've also been a juror

My experience was a bit different than yours. I was called in the days when King County would deem prospective jurors had to spend two weeks (!) on jury duty; it's now three days. If you're not called, you don't have to serve, and after three days, you're free to go.

After getting bounced out of several voir dires for being brutally honest (and most likely, stupid; fortunately for me, the judges seemed to think my comments were hilarious,) I ended up on a jury. The defendant was accused of exposing himself on a Metro (city) bus. The jury was told that if he was convicted, he'd have to register as a sex offender as part of his sentence.

I'm not sure what scared me more: The other jurors, or the prosecution glaring at the jurors. In those days, the only people who served as jurors were engineers from a local aerospace company (who got PTO for doing so,) and those who couldn't manage to get out of it. The attitudes displayed by several of the jurors scared the hell out of me, i.e.: "Is he gay? Everyone knows that all gay men are pedophiles." The woman who made the preceding comment to me is probably still curled on the King County Courthouse floor in the fetal position and crying for her mama.

We listened to evidence for several days. The defense attorney, in my opinion, seemed to be a bit unorganized. Being a juror isn't like it is on TV. Well, it wasn't till the last day of testimony. It seems that the arresting officer hadn't familiarized himself with the police report. It took a year for this case to come to trial. He'd obviously forgotten to review the report. The defense attorney asked him twice before beginning her questioning if he would like to review it; the police officer told her "no". Remember the defense attorney hadn't seemed like "all that?" She destroyed the police officer's testimony. It was amazing. It seems the case was one of mistaken identity. The prosecutor jumped out of her chair, slammed both palms on the table and shouted, "I want a sidebar! NOW!" Of course, we were sent to the jury room for quite some time. We were summoned back in, heard the closing statements, and retired to the jury room. When we arrived, I asked everyone if they'd like to take a vote "for fun". We voted the defendant innocent within five minutes of getting back to that room. We stalled another 45 minutes to make it "look good", according to the foreman. It was nice to watch the defendant walk away a free man. One thing's for sure: The prosecutor was pissed off at all of us.

This is my experience. I'm sure that most jurors are conscientious, do their best, and struggle with the thought they may be dooming an innocent person to a terrible fate. I don't like today's verdict for the following reason: Innocent people don't settle. Whatever one might think of Michael Jackson, if he was innocent, why did he pay that boy's family millions?

Julie

[KharmaTrain]

20. Definitely Courtroom Antics Are Part Of The Process

My wife served on a PI trial...far different than the one I served. It was pure theatrics as the defendant was trying to pry several thousands dollars from another person (or should I say their insurance company). There, I could see getting bored with the minutae of which dent happened where and whose car was in which position at the intersection.

Yes, sitting in a juror's pool can be quite an experience. Mine was in Cook County and you saw some of the scariest characters in there...especially at 8am.

I heard someone give the exact opposite reasoning about Jacko you just gave. He said, if Jackson was guilty in '93, why didn't the Prosecution go for it then and take it to a jury...not settle. I know laws were different then, but always interesting to see how people spin this story.

[Missy Vixen]

22. Good point

>He said, if Jackson was guilty in '93, why didn't the Prosecution go for it then and take it to a jury...not settle.<

I have read several people today pointing out that there evidently have been no victims for the past ten years. We can only hope that he got some help.

I'm sick inside thinking of the kids that were harmed, and how their parents essentially sold them out.

IMHO,
Julie

[theplutsnw]

13. As I heard someone say this afternoon

it is not a crime to be weird. You may all think I am weird myself, but I actually think MJ thinks he is Peter Pan. He had a terrible childhood and I am sure has a lot of issues (painfully obvious I know). Hopefully all of this can be put behind him. My only fear is that this high profile case does not put other child molestation cases in question. Great post, when my kids are in school full time and able to care for themselves, I hope to get on jury duty as well, that is assuming we still live in a country with due process.

AP in Seattle

[Booster]

14. Jury duty is interesting, boring, emotional, and then some days

it's impossible for you to keep your eyes open, but I really believe everybody should do it. Smart people always brag to me that they find ways to get out of jury duty, and, secretly, I hope some day they are the defendant and have a jury full of people who were'nt smart enough to get out of it. Pay back is a bitch. I met Michael Jackson and talked to him at a party years ago, not that that in any way makes me know anymore about the man than anyone else. But I was really shocked at how shy he was and so unsure of himself. I'm sure he's changed after all these years, and I really hope he gets the help he so obviously needs. I do think he has a problem; I just don't think this case was the right one - the accuser's had more problems than he does. I'm kind of glad he was found not guilty, but not if he continues on the road already traveled. Get some help, Mike.

[seemunkee]

15. Good post and good stories

At 48 I have only been called once and was not chosen. I was looking forward to serving and seeing the process in action but of the three trials that day only one went to trial, another one pleaded quilty before it started, and the last defendant didn't show and had a warrant issued for his/her arrest.
One have a one day/one jury system in our county so that's it for a minimum of seven years.

[Booster]

16. I forgot to add that if there is a 3 strikes case, I don't want to do

that either. I had a 3 strikes case where a young man had been convicted of petty burglary when he was a kid; his 2nd felony was he beat his neighbor's lawn mower to pieces with a baseball bat, and his 3rd (my case) was a single joint was found in his car in his girlfriend's purse - not even his joint. We had to convict due to the jury instructions, but that young man's face haunts he at night to this day. Hated that case.

[Bluebear]

17. When I was a juror: "If the cops arrested him he must be guilty"

Verbatim from a fellow juror. We hung, but I could not believe what I heard some of my colleagues on the jury say.

[dooner]

18. Well said

I served on a criminal trial that lasted 7 weeks (fortunately I was unemployed at the time). It was enlightening to see how thoughtfully the jurors went about their job. It did renew my faith in the legal system, and helps make sense of the juries decision in circus trials like this one.

[ibegurpard]

19. Thank you

Very frightening statements I'm seeing on this board today.
Do I think Michael Jackson is guilty of molestation? I think so. Would I let my kids hang out with him? Not in a million years. Would I convict him of these crimes? How would I know with sensational media coverage my only thing to go on?

Hope I'm never put on trial for something I didn't do with some of the people on these boards today sitting on my jury.

[bobbieinok]

21. was also called for jury duty in the summer about 4-5 years ago

there was a very large pool of prospective jurors

I was called as one of 20 for a drug trial

they never got to my name, but it was very interesting to hear the questions the judge and attorneys asked

I was surprised that people with relatives in jail and those with relatives who were police were not challenged

I found out later that before the trial began the defense atty (and defendant, I hope.....a young black guy) decided to plea bargain

in talking to others in the pool while waiting around that week I discovered that different judges had different rules for dismissing jurors.....one would dismiss if juror lived in defendant's neighborhood; others didn't even ask

I agree with others who have posted: if you're called for jury duty, do it

PS I heard some years ago that in our county it is almost impossible to be excused---there are too many trials......so teachers in the middle of finals aren't excused, etc