November 3, 2004

• I’ve been serving on Jury Duty for the last two days, and that has been quite an experience.  First of all, I really did think I would get stricken from the jury pool, because I honestly answered the defense attorney’s question as to whether or not I would hold it against the defendent if he didn’t get in the witness box and say, “I didn’t do it”.  I figure if you’re not willing to get on the witness stand and say you didn’t do it when the next 10 years of your life may be in the balance then you must have something to hide.  However, I didn’t get stricken and ended up as one of the 12 jurors. 

  
  

  This was a case of indecency with a child (not molesting a child, but indecency with a child), and I was ready and willing to send the guy to prison for it. Actually, all 12 of us were just “itching” to send him away.  The lawyers and the judge spent quite a bit of time with us before the trial even started explaining the laws to us. First and foremost, that a person is presumed innocent unless they are PROVEN guilty. . . beyond a resonable doubt.  We couldn’t just think that he probably did it, we had to be convinced beyond a resonable doubt.  And secondly, the judge made it quite clear to us all that you COULD NOT . . MUST NOT . . . hold it against the defendant if they chose not to testify on their own behalf.   

  
  

  Well, the 14 year old victim was very uncertain on details like dates, times, distances and counterdicted herself on several occasions.  She also was very vague as to exactly what the guy had done to be brought up on the charges.  The second witness for the prosecution had not even witnessed the event, but was rather there to point out logistics as to where this and that were located.  She also got very confused on the stand and contradicted herself and even at one point turned to the jury and said “I’m so confused”.  Then the other person, the girl’s aunt, who had also witnessed the event, and could have corroberated the girl’s story, didn’t show up, although the jury was not told that she was supposed to be there nor that she had not shown.  We were left to wonder why in the heck the prosecution had not called HER to the witness stand.   In the end, we 12 jurors . . . ALL 12 of us, concluded that the state had come no where near proving their case, and it just wasn’t fair to send a man to prison for 10 years for something he maybe, might have done, or for something that a child had misinterpreted as intentional.  We still had questions though, so we sent a written note to the judge asking why the aunt wasn’t called to the stand.  He sent back a note saying that we had all the evidence and we should make our determination based on the evidence we had . So after another half hour of deliberation we gave a verdict of not guilty. 

  
  

  After the verdict was read in the court room, the judge said that if anyone had any questions he would be available after court to answer those questions. Eight of the jurors stayed to talk to him, but he didn’t know the answers to our questions.  He said that basically the judge is there as an “umpire”.  He didn’t know why the aunt wasn’t called. He didn’t know who the 3rd witness was that was sworn in, but who wasn’t called. He didn’t even know if the guy had ever been up on similar charges before.  (That was a shocker to us all, because we thought the judge knew everything the lawyers did).   He did, however, suggest that if we really wanted to know the answers to ask the prosecution lawyers, so we all head out for their offices, but bumped into them in the hall.  When we said we had questions they both came back into the jury deliberation room to answer them. 

  
  

  The aunt had been subpoenaed but had never shown up.  She lives 3 hours away and does not have a phone. The other lady that was sworn in but who never testified, was not even a witness to the event. She was the victim’s sister and had somehow inadvertantly gotten herded in with the other two witnesses when the bailiff had gone out into the hallway and asked that the witnesses come in to be sworn in.  BIZARRE.

  
  

  And lastly, when we asked if this was the guy’s first arrest for this type offence, the prosecutors told us that he had 3 other priors . . . one of which he’d spent 6 months in jail for and two were dismissed due to lack of evidence.  Why, in heaven’s name, we asked, had they not told us about his priors . . . we would have convicted him in a minute.  He informed us that it is illegal for them to mention priors UNLESS the defendant accidentally lets something slip while on the stand . . . then, once the can of worms is opened the prosecution can use it all . . . hence the reason for him not taking the stand in his own defense. 

  
  

  I feel really bad about this.  I feel used and betrayed.  I feel like we’ve failed society.  What’s wrong with the system when the prosecution CANNOT tell the jury about a child preditor’s prior history?  I doubt very seriously that this man will change his behavior, and we can ONLY hope that the next time he does something like this the police/prosecution can build a more solid case and be better prepared in the court room. 

  
  

  My heart goes out to the young girl and her family.  I apologize.  We let you down.

  • 2:45 pm
  • 13 Comments