Jury Dynamics

[PSM]

...and the Zimmerman trial.

I’ve been on Jury Duty 7 times in Los Angeles, County, including 5 criminal juries in downtown LA. One was a 2nd Degree Murder trial.

When we were on the jury panel, we were informed of the 2nd Degree charge. During voir dire, we were asked by the defense counsel if the facts of the case showed to be less than 2nd Degree Murder would be be able to find for a lesser charge, if available. We all answered in the affirmative. At the beginning of the trial, we knew (though defense counsel’s hints) that we had that option and held it in the back of our minds.

After the trial, we got together one last time and compared “notes”. At the beginning, we all admitted that we thought that this would be an easy trial and that the defendant was guilty of something.

Once charged with the case, we were instructed that we could, in fact, find for a lesser charge of Manslaughter in various degrees and those were described.

In the Jury Room, a jury dynamic develops. It’s starts as early as the original pool called to the courtroom. It can take several days to select a jury and people form “cliques” for coffee and lunch breaks. Once selected to the jury, some of the members of those cliques may still be together. And, once on the jury, more cliques develop. There is certainly crossover and one clique may well be a part of another. The thing is, leaders surface very early on in the jury selection process. . .in a 12 member jury.

So, what happens in a 6 person jury? I don’t know. I’ve never been on one.

Though instructed not to, we had a “straw vote” early on after asking if anyone had any questions for the Court or needed any testimony read back. The vote was 8-4. We each explained our vote and spent the rest of the next few of days defending our position. And we did have testimony read back and evidence brought in.

In the end, we found the defendant “Not Guilty.”

I’m not sure that individuals, in a 6 person jury, will have the strength, experience, wisdom, or group support to stand up and defend themselves against opposing arguments. It was a struggle in a 12 person jury. BTW, it was 8-4 guilty on that first vote. And, no, it's not the script of "Twelve Angry Men". It's Jury Duty.

Pat

[JJ_BPK]

Pat

I've been on about 8-10 criminal juries. Most of those were in the Keys, where sober jurist are a premium.. In 17 years, I was called 13 times....

On each we started deliberations with a straw vote to gauge the direction. Then we would start a roundtable 1-on-1 to support each of our views.

NEVER did I see a 100% yea/nay on the 1st vote.

I did not see a difference between 6 or 12 person juries. The dynamics where consistent.

I did see a lot of people that should not have been chosen. People that did not listen to the judge. People that had completely unreasonable reasons for their choices. People that were per-determined to be PRO or CON base on externals.

1)one voted no conviction on a piece of evidence the judge had specifically said we could not use. She through the judge was wrong and would not change,, until we told the judge and he came in to clarify his point.

2)one lady wanted a no conviction because the arresting officer didn't have a shirt on. It was a street level drug deal in the hood. He wore flip-flops & shorts for the "buy". She could not get past the idea that he was "out of uniform"...

3)4 out 6 jury voted no conviction because the defendant(S) were a "nice" young gay couple. It was domestic abuse, they were caught at home, one with a knife against the other with a golf club. GAY trumped the violence the two were capable of. They thought they would "work it out"

Net Net,, I don't see any easy end to the case..

If these ladies don't have any experience with criminal juries, they could do whatever...

Only GOD knows what to going on in their mines...

Though instructed not to, we had a “straw vote”

Never heard that issue??

Although one very nice bailiff did remind us that if we spent "at least 1 hour" on deliberations,, we would receive FREE lunch. It was funny, when we came back to court, the judge announced a miss trial because of some procedural problem during prosecutions closing statement. He was not a happy judge.

[Pete]

Been called a number of times but never made it to a jury.

[craigepo]

I tried a murder case a few weeks ago. The jury was back with a guilty verdict in about an hour.

One thing I always do is give sack juror a copy of the jury instructions. It seems to decrease the number of jury questions back to the court, and makes deliberations go much faster.

I have noticed one habit of good trial attorneys. During closing arguments, they always show the jury, "talking them", the written jury instructions. They also remind the jury that they swore to apply the law to the facts. This really helps tighten up the good jurors, who in turn work on the others.

Jury selection is a bear. Recently, Missouri quit using voter rolls for jury panels, and now uses DMV lists. Gave us a lot more prospective jurors, but we also get tons of convicted felons as well.

I haven't had a chance to watch much of the Zimmerman trial, but I will say this---never bet money on what a jury will do. That said, the jury usually does the right thing.

[longrange1947]

Been called, and never picked. The defense does not seem to like me.

[sinjefe]

Originally Posted by PSM

I’ve been on Jury Duty 7 times in Los Angeles, County, including 5 criminal juries in downtown LA. One was a 2nd Degree Murder trial.

Pat

You are a loser.

[sinjefe]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

I've been on about 8-10 criminal juries. Most of those were in the Keys, where sober jurist are a premium.. In 17 years, I was called 13 times....

You are an even bigger loser.

[JJ_BPK]

Originally Posted by sinjefe

You are an even bigger loser.

For a FOG it's kinda fun. The excuses that come up in voir dire?? Reminded me of the 60t's..

So much Cheech & Chong dialog.

Cheech: Responsibility is a heavy responsibility!

*****************

Cheech: Somebody ripped off the thing I ripped off!

******************

Gloria's Mom: [while driving] Watch the road.

Cheech: OK, where's it gonna go.

*******************

Cheech: Man, if you had a second brain, it would die of loneliness, man.

************************

Cheech: Want me to teach you some Spanish, man?

Chong: Okay.

Cheech: When you see a friend, you say, hey, how's it going, pendejo?

Chong: Hey, how's it going, pendecko?

Cheech: ...yeah, that's close enough.

Chong: What does that mean, man?

Cheech: Oh, it means my really good friend.

Chong: How's it going, pend... Pen... how was that, again?

Cheech: Pendejo.

Chong: Pendecko.

*********************

Chong: You're driving like an idiot, man.

Cheech: I just can't get used to these automatics, man.

Chong: Yeah, they are real complicated, aren't they?
Share this

Cheech: Shit, man, I'm gonna be late for work again. That's the fifth time this week, and it's only Tuesday, man.

*******************

Chong: I dig it, man. It's good. But you know, while you were singing that, I came up with another song, man.

Cheech: Oh, yeah?

Chong: Yeah. It's like the same thing, only different.

[PSM]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

I did not see a difference between 6 or 12 person juries. The dynamics where consistent.

That's good to hear. It just seems that one person could dominate a 6 person jury more readily than a 12 person jury. Or, at least, the ducks would line up more quickly.

Originally Posted by sinjefe

You are a loser.

Actually, I enjoyed jury duty downtown. How else can you spend a paid week or two off work, in downtown LA, with free parking, and at least 2 hours everyday for lunch. Chinatown one day, Olvera Street the next...

Here, I'll probably get sent to Bisbee.

Pat

[Pete]

Lots of folks ain't got time for jury duty - and don't care.......

Until they are on trial and wonder where all their jury members came from.

[sinjefe]

Originally Posted by Pete

Lots of folks ain't got time for jury duty - and don't care.......

Until they are on trial and wonder where all their jury members came from.

One of the great scams pulled on us by the elite. That and voting. As if either mattered. Did you watch the judge in the Zimmerman trial? Clearly biased towards the prosecution, IMHO.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by sinjefe

One of the great scams pulled on us by the elite. That and voting. As if either mattered.

Terms like particapatory citizenship, individual and collective rights, civic duty, usw come to mind.

I sat on a number of court martials and administrative releif boads, and have been chosen as a jury member one time since retiring. We found the defendant to be a 'player' but not, based upon any evidence presented, guilty of what he was being accused of by a seemingly vindictive plaintiff and her family.

I have found the process to be fairly equitable, in general, with the usual caveats based upon the type of case being heard and the combined qualities of the people involved in investigating, prosecuting, defending, hearing, and adjudicating it all.

Richard

[PSM]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

The dynamics where consistent.

You were correct, Jim! Clearly, Florida has better jurors than California.

Pat

[MSRlaw]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

Pat

I've been on about 8-10 criminal juries. Most of those were in the Keys, where sober jurist are a premium.. In 17 years, I was called 13 times....

On each we started deliberations with a straw vote to gauge the direction. Then we would start a roundtable 1-on-1 to support each of our views.

NEVER did I see a 100% yea/nay on the 1st vote.

I did not see a difference between 6 or 12 person juries. The dynamics where consistent.

I did see a lot of people that should not have been chosen. People that did not listen to the judge. People that had completely unreasonable reasons for their choices. People that were per-determined to be PRO or CON base on externals.

1)one voted no conviction on a piece of evidence the judge had specifically said we could not use. She through the judge was wrong and would not change,, until we told the judge and he came in to clarify his point.

2)one lady wanted a no conviction because the arresting officer didn't have a shirt on. It was a street level drug deal in the hood. He wore flip-flops & shorts for the "buy". She could not get past the idea that he was "out of uniform"...

3)4 out 6 jury voted no conviction because the defendant(S) were a "nice" young gay couple. It was domestic abuse, they were caught at home, one with a knife against the other with a golf club. GAY trumped the violence the two were capable of. They thought they would "work it out"

Net Net,, I don't see any easy end to the case..

If these ladies don't have any experience with criminal juries, they could do whatever...

Only GOD knows what to going on in their mines...





Never heard that issue??

Although one very nice bailiff did remind us that if we spent "at least 1 hour" on deliberations,, we would receive FREE lunch. It was funny, when we came back to court, the judge announced a miss trial because of some procedural problem during prosecutions closing statement. He was not a happy judge.

what years? judge mark jones? sandra taylor?

i worked under mark kohl for a few years. i found it very easy to get convictions down there, much more so than palm beach or broward counties.