shape
carat
color
clarity

Hung jury, 11 to 1, mistrial

Alex T

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
6,651
Craziness.I thought that if someone pulled a stunt like this, it would be a reason to boot them and call in one of the alternates.

This. Absolutely this is what wouid happen in the UK. Or the entire jury would be dismissed & a new one selected immediately for retrial. The very thought that tge defendant has control over and juror decisions blows my mind.

Can I also ask if in the US the jury have to all be in agreement? Here, the majority voters win, so in this case @kenny the defendant would have been found guilty.
 

MjK1

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
359
After 3 weeks my jury duty service is finally over.
Charge was 1st degree murder.

They took 3 votes during jury deliberations; every time it was 11 guilty, 1 not guilty.
Prosecution's evidence and witness testimony was a slam dunk, well it was to the 11 with functioning brains.

The coroner testified that 3 of the 6 gunshots caused wounds that were fatal, through the brain, the heart and the liver.
Coroner pics of exit wounds were hard to view.
It happened outside a bar in a rough part of town.
The bar's 6 video cameras captured everything.

The holdout juror kept insisting judging is against the Bible, even though all jurors were told (both before the trial started, and after closing arguments) the law and jury instructions explicitly state that jurors must put personal beliefs aside and decide the case based ONLY on the evidence and witness testimony presented in the courtroom.
She violated the law, so now a murderer may walk free, or there may be a retrial.

The defense attorney lied through his teeth.
He mentioned God and we jurors risking our eternal life with a guilty verdict for an innocent man, easily 40 times over the 3 weeks.
Nobody stopped him or objected to his extensive religious preaching during the trial.
The bastard knew exactly what he was doing ... blowing a dog whistle heard by members of the huge club of brainwashed and easily-manipulated fearful people.
It worked.

What ever happened to separation of church and state?
I am pissed!

This really sucks! I am not surprised religion crept into the court, but am surprised at the extent it crept in. I am a Canadian living in the USA, and I have found that there is no such thing as separation of church and state here.
 

MrsBlue

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 30, 2013
Messages
402
This. Absolutely this is what wouid happen in the UK. Or the entire jury would be dismissed & a new one selected immediately for retrial. The very thought that tge defendant has control over and juror decisions blows my mind.

Can I also ask if in the US the jury have to all be in agreement? Here, the majority voters win, so in this case @kenny the defendant would have been found guilty.

It must be unanimous although some states used to allow majority verdicts.


I know people in a jurisdiction where majority convictions now have to be retried and the locals are wondering how to do that in a fair and safe way.

Side note: I once served on a jury where, halfway through the trial, one of the jurors recognized a witness. They had previously worked together or something. The juror notified the judge and was called up for a private discussion. The juror was dismissed and an alternate called in. That's why I thought the woman in Kenny's case would be replaced by an alternate. Not for her vote but for her clear prejudice and dishonesty during the process.

When we had procedural questions, we would send a note to the judge via the bailiff. I'm stunned this wasn't done by the foreperson in this case.
 

Alex T

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
6,651
It must be unanimous although some states used to allow majority verdicts.


I know people in a jurisdiction where majority convictions now have to be retried and the locals are wondering how to do that in a fair and safe way.

Side note: I once served on a jury where, halfway through the trial, one of the jurors recognized a witness. They had previously worked together or something. The juror notified the judge and was called up for a private discussion. The juror was dismissed and an alternate called in. That's why I thought the woman in Kenny's case would be replaced by an alternate. Not for her vote but for her clear prejudice and dishonesty during the process.

When we had procedural questions, we would send a note to the judge via the bailiff. I'm stunned this wasn't done by the foreperson in this case.

Thank you for this link - it makes for interesting reading. I am still stunned that this whole trial is allowed to unravel due to a juror who refuses to allocate guilt due to her religious beliefs. As what happened when you sat on jury, she should have been dismissed & replaced. It boggles my little brain!
 

PinkAndBlueBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
1,007
Reason 194,579,375 as to why people suck...
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
30,302
... That's why I thought the woman in Kenny's case would be replaced by an alternate. Not for her vote but for her clear prejudice and dishonesty during the process.

When we had procedural questions, we would send a note to the judge via the bailiff. I'm stunned this wasn't done by the foreperson in this case.

The foreperson did send notes to the judge via the baliff.
This is why, during deliberations, we 2 alternates were called into the courtroom 3 (IIRC) times, as I have already detailed.
I didn't bother explaining the first step of each time, being the 4woman sending a note to the judge via the bailiff, I omitted that because my post was already quite long and it seemed to go without saying.

The 4woman just didn't actually state in her note that it wasn't simply questions clarifying
evidence or the law, rather it was one juror refusing to follow the law.

I know this because the 4woman herself stated this to me when we two spoke alone in the parking structure.
She also said if she could go back in time she would have told the judge that she and all the other jurors agreed that the holdout was not following the law, the jury instruction she swore to follow.
 

MrsBlue

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 30, 2013
Messages
402
@kenny sorry for the confusion. The point I was making was about the procedural question, not the bailiffs job.

In my case we didn't just send the vote count. We asked a few questions to clarify the instructions. But I can see how a foreperson can be too overwhelmed at the moment to explicitly mention that the Bible lady isn't following instructions. Some people don't like that sort of confrontation.

Interesting story though. Thanks for sharing.
 

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
46,362
Ugh that is not right. She wasted your time and energy, the court's time and energy and the time and energy of many others. And lots of money was also wasted. She should be prosecuted herself. IMO.

:nono:
 

Lookinagain

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
1,356
The foreman should definitely have submitted a question to the judge about this and I'm pretty sure he would have replaced that juror with an alternate. Hopefully the prosecutor will bring the case again against the defendant and hone the questions he/she asks in voir dire.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
30,302
So, should I just keep my mouth shut and move on, or report Bible Lady's crime to the authorities?

After all, voting her not-guilty is also judging. :doh::doh::doh:
 

pearlsngems

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 4, 2010
Messages
1,636
At this point it can't affect the outcome of the trial, so I'd say let it go.
 

Roselina

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2020
Messages
843
Weird. The defence attorney preaches in court and judge does not intervene? How could that be? There is separation of state and religion in the US...
 

Lookinagain

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
1,356
So, should I just keep my mouth shut and move on, or report Bible Lady's crime to the authorities?

After all, voting her not-guilty is also judging. :doh::doh::doh:

It is too late to change the outcome of this trial, and I don't know the ins and outs of criminal prosecutions, but you might feel better if you tried to tell the prosecutor that the juror said
judging is against the Bible

At least if there is another trial (and I hope there is) the prosecutor might ask more pointed questions of potential jurors about something like this. And it might make you feel that you at least tried to do something to make things right.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Guess What: Dispersion and Fire Aren't the Same Thing
    Men In Pearls
    Men In Pearls
    Celebrating The Life Of Elsa Peretti
    Celebrating The Life Of Elsa Peretti

Need expert help finding that diamonds?

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top