So, I know I said I wasn't sure what I would say about the case I was assigned to while on jury duty for the past seven days, or when or how many details, and I still don't know if it's interesting or if I can make it interesting, but follows are some emails I sent during the whole thing. No, not from the courtroom or the jury room, and yes, I obeyed the judges admonition to not discuss the trial!
At the end, a (short?) synopsis of what I've been actually saying to people (surprise, surprise: I do actually speak to some people. Yes, I have functioning vocal chords!), as well as some reflection about the experience itself.
From: Irene
To: Renee
Date: Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Subject: Mystery!
Hi, Renee! How are you? I am a total dork... I'm on jury duty with someone from [a department I worked at in 2006, where Renee still works] and I can't remember his name and I'm too embarrassed to ask. I should know this! Hope you have a good day!
From: Renee
To: Irene
Date: Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 1:34 PM
Subject: RE: Mystery!
We didn't have too many men, so this should be easy. I'm thinking it's either R. or E. So has there just been awkward glances between the two of you (ha, ha)?
From: Irene
To: Renee
Date: Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 5:33 PM
Subject: RE: Mystery!
Hi, Renee! Thank you!! I was going crazy. I thought it was R. but I didn't want to make a mistake. He recognized me, and then I put 2 and 2 together... took me a while, but I'm so bad with names. We even had lunch at Subway together today and I'm all, what is this guy's NAME?? Anyway, thank YOU! Hope you're having a good day!
From: Renee
To: Irene
Date: Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 8:28 AM
Subject: RE: Mystery!
That is so funny Irene! I can't believe you survived an entire lunch without knowing his name. I don't think I would've been able to focus on the conversation.
Take care Irene and have a good weekend!
...
From: Irene
To: Sarah
Date: Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 9:03 PM
Subject: Jury duty is over!
Howdy! So my jury duty is finally done! What an experience. Interesting frustrating enlightening... And over. When we left last night I was really worried that we wouldn't be able to agree [on a verdict]. We were debating [which specific charge to go with]. One of the jurors was unconvinced; another was pretty sure she wouldn't change her mind. All of the back and forth discussion was upsetting to me, though I respected everyone. It was just hard! Anyway. How was your week? Do you have fun plans for the weekend? Well better go. I'm at the theater and I have a cue coming up...
Sent from Gmail for mobile mobile.google.com
{Message from Sarah with stuff that's personal to her and not for mass consumption.}
From: Irene
To: Sarah
Date: Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Subject: RE: Jury duty is over!
Hey, there,
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED] We found out later that it was [REDACTED] but they couldn't tell us that in court. We saw all kinds of grisly things: autopsy photos, morgue reports, heard testimony from the girlfriend of the dead guy [REDACTED]. She was terrified of the defendant and cried a lot on the stand. One of the other jurors saw her say (mouth) to someone, when we were leaving the room "He's staring at me!" meaning, the defendant. It was interesting and disturbing. There was also a lot of drug use among all the people around him, and the defendant was known to do meth and heroin. After the murder, [REDACTED].
We found him guilty of [REDACTED]. His sentencing is in two weeks, and thank God I'm not a part of that. I think the judge finds the sentence? Or maybe another jury? We also found out later that while he was mostly calm in the courtroom while we were there, when we were gone, he was very violent and spoke out a lot and cussed the judge. During the whole trial they had at least 3 armed cops in the courtroom, and during the sentencing, there were at least 7. It was kinda scary. [REDACTED]
...
So I guess I'm not hiding the fact that this was a murder trial. I don't know why I couldn't have been put on a nice little welfare fraud case or something! Here are the major points that I seem to make each time I talk to people about this:
The lawyers
The Deputy DA whose case this was, was fantastic. He was organized, calm, acted interested in the witnesses, and was very polite. Afterwards, we met with him in the hallway and he answered a lot of questions. He was great.
The defense attorney was a whole different story. Now, we found out later that he didn't have much to work with. This was evident during the trial, but at first we thought it was because he was kind of incompetent. He had a hard time forming questions. He was a bit patronizing toward us, and toward the witnesses. He wore bad suits. He had a very pasty complexion. He made a joke, at the beginning of the trial, about all the women on the jury being in love with him (!). He made another highly inappropriate comment that I won't share here.
The defendant
He seemed calm while we were in the courtroom; we found out later that this was an act. He was violent, verbally abusive toward the judge and others in the courtroom. He required about 7 armed guards when the verdict was read but he didn't (thankfully) do anything while we were in the room. We found out later that after we left, he cussed out the judge, his lawyer, and various other people; the judge wouldn't allow him in the courtroom after that. A very bad guy all around. I'm sorry that a life was taken by this guy. I feel that he got what he deserved. I hope I never, ever meet anyone like him.
The trial
The trial itself was fascinating. Seeing the way the lawyers worked and how the DA put together the case was totally interesting. Also, the DA had a very cool overhead projector that didn't need transparencies. However, it wasn't his presentation or his presentation devices that convinced us - we were impressed by the evidence and the witnesses. I guess, like everyone else, I have a little bit of the voyeur in me (haven't I mentioned that I like to snoop?), because it was totally interesting to see photos of someone else's home, of people I don't know, to hear them tell their stories under oath (though some of them quite clearly did not wish to be there) and to see what they were like. The judge was calm, fair, and described to us lots of complex legal stuff in a mostly easy-to-understand manner. He stopped a few witnesses and asked them to slow down or allow the lawyer to finish his question before answering, and he did this out of concern for his court reporter, who he was extremely solicitous of. The court reporter's job seems really interesting, and I was totally curious about how she gets every bit of every word spoken in that courtroom down. When we started deliberating, one of the first things we did was to request a "read-back" of testimony from a man we all considered to be the most important witness. We requested it at 4 p.m. one afternoon, and by the time we were assembled the next day in the courtroom, it was ready for us. She took the witness stand and read it to us, complete with the "ums" and "uhs" and it was just as interesting the second time around. It took about an hour to hear all of it.
The jurors
Deliberations allowed me to really get to know those 11 other people. During the trial itself, I mostly at lunch by myself (at Chipotle or Subway), I think some of them got together but I didn't, except for my lunch with R. In the courtroom, I was seated, obviously, between Jurors No. 8 and 10. No. 8 was a lady I sat next to in the gallery while we were waiting for our numbers to be called: we thought it was a little funny we were both chosen! Here's what I remember about the 11 other jurors:
Juror No. 1: T1, male, probably around 50. I forget what T1 does for a living, but he's a professional bass player, married to a flutist. We talked flutes quite a bit. He knew more about his wife's flute than Patrick knows about mine! We sat next to each other in the jury room, and talked quite a bit during breaks. He was reading a John Jakes novel (not during anything trial-related). Fun guy, showed me photos of the group he plays with and invited me to contact him about concert information. I liked him a lot.
Juror No. 2: B1, also male, probably in his 60s. A retired schoolteacher, B1 taught chemistry and math. He was very smart, and cautious about stating a firm opinion until the very end (as we all did, but he was extra cautious). He also is sailboat enthusiast. A good-looking 60-something! Yes, I guess I like those older men. White hair and a very youthful personality, wore a baseball cap every day (which he removed in the courtroom and the jury room). Juror No. 5 seemed to bond with him. He was our go-to guy for information about guns and technical things.
Juror No. 3: B2, an older lady, probably in her 60s. She dresses like my mom: favors pastel colors, all denim outfits, with embroidered details, and carries a quilted purse. B2's a Speech therapist, and works with children. She took many, many notes during the trial (we all did), and stated, when deliberations started, that she "listens by writing." She could stand to just listen a bit more. Juror No. 5, during deliberations, frequently asked her (and one highly memorable time, told her quite forcefully) to be quiet. Teller of long-winded, silly jokes.
Juror No. 4: E1, another lady. Probably in her early 50s. She has terrific hair: sort of Liz Taylor meets Liza Minelli. Black, shot through with gray, coiffed very purposefully in a very vertical style. She was very sweet, a great listener, and shared a few surprising personal things from her own family that paralleled some of the things we heard during the trial. Sympathetic and fair.
Juror No. 5: E2, a young woman. Probably not 30 yet. Thin, pretty, curly hair. Very opinionated but at the same time, unfamiliar with many things we discussed, both related to and unrelated to the task at hand (example: she didn't know who Joey Bishop was or about Monty Python). It was hard to take her seriously sometimes. Worked in some kind of investment business. Originally from Orange County. She noticed B1's sweater had microscopic sailboats on it during the first day of deliberation and may have scored an invitation to go for a sail with him and his wife. She stated several times that she had zero experience with guns, drugs or the life the people involved in this case appeared to lead. Most of us didn't either; these comments from her irritated me. She was obviously sheltered. But! Fun to talk to about other things.
Juror No. 6: B3. Our foreperson. She's an engineer, blond, probably in her early 40s. B3 told me several times that she thought I was a lot younger than I am! I surprised her by knowing about, among other things, Joey Bishop and Monty Python. She was a great foreperson until the last day of deliberations, when she introduced a topic none of us had questioned (for good reason: it was about something a guy we all agreed was a liar had written in a statement, about something he said the guy said to him. It was never brought up in court, and she totally opened a can of worms we didn't need. Totally not an issue for any of us but she wanted to talk about it for an hour). This bugged the hell out of me.
Juror No. 7: K, mother of 5. Very deliberate when she spoke, took great notes. I sat next to her and T1 in the jury room, and could tell that she's a very kind, very thoughtful person. She always let others speak, she never interrupted (like E1) she always acknowledged what you had said, and she didn't act like she knew everything (like E2). Also shared some interesting personal stuff with us.
Juror No. 8: J1, hip lady! J1 is probably in her 60s, too. She had a totally interesting voice, and I later found out that she's originally from that town in New York where the shooting happened on Friday. I liked sitting next to her in the jury box: even though we didn't talk at all while in the courtroom, she had a calming presence. She invited me to lunch with her and the other ladies during the last few days, and I actually accepted. If you know me at all, you know that I rarely eat lunch with people, and never with people I hardly know. She didn't know (or acted like she didn't know) what NPR is, and I thought that was funny, but she was really nice.
Juror No. 9: Yours truly.
Juror No. 10: T2. T2 was probably somewhere between 40 and 45, a blond woman, very professional. Very interested in details and in discussing details. Also timelines: she was very interested in timelines. Because the event we were concerned with happened over 8 years ago, and these people were vague, at best, with respect to the exact time something happened, this fascination with timelines was pretty much a dead end. Tended to get sidetracked by speculation. She did inspire my one great comment during deliberation: she was trying to backtrack to what the guy was thinking by examining his known behavior after the event. I have to admit I got frustrated with this line of discussion, and I said: "We have to consider the event as three separate moments in time: before, during, and after. Time only flows in one direction." It didn't shut her up, which was fine, but she acknowledged that we were never going to be able to extrapolate from any actions other than those we knew about (I think I also used the word "extrapolate" during this discussion) and eventually she gave up trying to work it out that way. She and I had a lot of interesting back and forth in the jury room, and she was fun to talk to during breaks, too.
Juror No. 11: J2. Birdlike older woman, with short, fluffy white hair. Probably in her 60s or 70s. Retired teacher. Could be sharp with comments. Was the one to ask if E2 knew who Joey Bishop was, then threw it to me when E2 didn't know. Funny: after our verdict was prepared and we were waiting for the bailiff, she told us one very funny, slightly inappropriate joke that had us all practically on the floor. Of course I can't remember it now.
Juror No. 12: R1. Very quiet, late 30s or early 40s, male. Never joined us for lunch. Finally heard his voice in the jury room. Tentative, questioning, seemed intimidated by the process. Me, too, buddy. On Thursday, we took an informal vote to see where we all stood, and he was the one dissenter. Scared the hell out of me, because it was the end of the day and I was afraid that overnight we would all change our minds. The next day, after B3's long discussion about the issue no one cared about, he asked us if anyone had changed their mind. No one answered. Finally, I asked him, "Have you changed your mind?" Because really, if we had changed our minds, we were all screwed. No one wanted a hung jury. We wanted to agree. On Friday morning all of us looked like we hadn't slept. I personally took it hard Thursday night, and was anxious about coming to a conclusion.
Alternate Juror No. 1: V. V was probably in her late 40s. I'll be honest: my first impression of her was "Librarian." Or possibly, "Lesbian." Turned out I was totally wrong. I have no idea what she does for a living, though we did exchange cards (we all did). She told me she was a big athlete until she injured her knee (softball, volleyball).
Alternate Juror No. 2: R2. This is the guy I used to work with.
Deliberations
During deliberations, the alternate jurors had to report to the 6th floor juror holding tank, I mean, room. They missed out on all the fun. Deliberations started Wednesday morning. We talked about everything for two whole days, and only at the very end of the day on Thursday did we start to talk about what we might be thinking about the charges. It was interesting that everyone had such great notes. The judge told us at the beginning of the trial that taking notes was fine, but to make sure you didn't miss something - eye contact, or other physical observations - while we were taking notes. Besides taking down the things that were important to me, I also made notations about demeanor, the defendant's actions, the people in the gallery, and questions I wanted to ask later. We got to take our notebooks home with us at the end of the trial, but they were to remain in the courtroom the rest of the time.
No comments:
Post a Comment