- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
June 2013 Moms
lioness13
member
My jury duty experience
lioness13
member
*I am too tired to edit this long azz post so excuse the errors. Hope you enjoy @mcbush!
Day 1- I'll start with jury selection. Everyone sign in then names are called for the jury pool for each trial that day. Each jury pool has 36 people. Once I was picked for a jury pool I was given a number and lined up with the other jurors. We were told that we would be called by our jury number and not our name during jury selection.
First we were given the name of the defendant and told the date and the nature of the case. The defendant was accused of murdering the victim and October 2008. Then jury selection began. During jury selection we were asked a number of questions including these:
Do you know or have ever heard of the defendant or the victim?
You know anyone related to this trial, the judge, the lawyers, or anyone else in this courtroom?
You know anyone that works for the blank county courthouse?
Have you ever had a memorable experience, good or bad, with a police officer that you remember?
Do you know where the (poor black) area of town is?
Do you have a sibling? Has your sibling ever stood up for you for you for your sibling?
Do you have any children?
If you ever witnessed or been the victim of a violent crime?
Do you know anyone else in the jury pool?
If you ever served on a jury? Were you the foreman?
Is there any reason you may not be able to serve on this jury?
Is there any reason you think you cannot give the defendant a fair trial?
They asked more questions but I don't remember them. They split us up a few times and we had a long lunch break. The whole process took from 10am-7pm. The chosen jury consisted of 14 women (two alternates). Once we are chosen, we were taken into a room behind the court room and given instructions about returning the next day.
Day 2- On the first day of the trial, prosecuting attorney opened her case with the statement "Yo baby's daddy's gonna die today." This is what the defendant allegedly said to the victim's baby's mama. The prosecuting attorney, describes the case as a situation where the victim was shot because he had an argument with the defendant's brother. The victim had a baby with T and when he was away at jail, T started dating the defendant's brother. When the victim returned from jail him and T got back together. The defendant's brother called T and him and the victim got into an argument over her. A day later 2 men in hoodies approached the victim and 2 friends as they were walking down the street and shot at them. The victim died from gunshot wounds in the hospital a day later. One of the friends was shot in the hand. The other was grazed by a bullet in his stomach. A day after the victim died, T went to the police and told them what the defendant said to her the morning of the shooting and identified him in a photo lineup.
The defense declined to make an opening testimony.
The first person the prosecuting attorney called to the stand was the victim's mother. She asked the mother about her son and held up a large photo of him smiling for us to see. It was really hard not to cry during her testimony. She was very emotional. The victim was only 17 years old.
Next up T, the baby mama, was called to the stand. At the time of the crime she was only 16 years old. She was asked about what the defendant said to her and her relationship with the defendants brother. She said that she had the victim's baby in May. He was not present because he was in jail. She lied on the stand saying he was in school at the time. The defense attorney called her out on it later. They did not want us to know that's where he had been because we may have used that against him so I think she was confused about what to say. We were asked to disregard the information about him being in jail. In June she started "hooking up" with the defendant's brother. She said she witnessed the phone argument between the victim and the defendant's brother. She also said she told the victim what the defendant said to her that morning and he said he didn't care. He said, "If I die, I die."
Next up were the two witnesses that with the victim when he was killed. The first witness said that originally he did not want to cooperate with the police because he did not want to be a snitch. He perjured himself on the stand by telling the defense attorney that he did not want to cooperate with the police then admitting to lying about it. Also, he looked like he was high on drugs. The defense attorney asked him if he was on any medication and he said no. He testified that the shooters were wearing hoodies and he could not see their faces well. He also testified that he identified the defendant in a picture lineup a month after the crime.
The second witness testified that he was not able to see the shooters clearly because they had hoodies on. He also stated that he did not identify the defendant in a line up until 2012 - four years after the crime. He was very emotional. He admitted to having been in jail and said he did not want to send anyone there but he had to be honest about what he saw because he wanted to honor his dead friend and his friend's mother. The highlight of his testimony was when he told us that he'd received a call from a girl saying that the defendant was looking for him to kill him. The witness was upset because the investigator called the girl his girlfriend. He explained that the girl was not his girlfriend. She was just someone he fu$ked in his homeboy's bathroom once. I had to hold in my laughter.
Day 3 -They showed us bullet casings that were found on the scene. There was a ballistics expert interviewed. No fingerprints were found on the casings. The County coroner was interviewed. They showed us photos of the victim's body at the corner's office. Details were given on the number of bullet wounds and how the bullets entered and exited the body. That was hard to look at.
Day 4- The Investigating detective took the stand and talked about his involvement in the case. Because the victim was alive when the crime was reported, he did not get involved until it was ruled as a homicide after the death of the victim two days later. He stated that there were no other suspects. The detective interviewed the defendant after he spoke to his brother. They would not allow us to see a tape of the interview because the detective made references to the defendant being guilty on the tape. He was asked why he did not charge the defendant with the prime until four years later. He said he was waiting for more evidence. The defense attorney pulled out of him that he was moving to a new job a few months later and was trying to close cases. He was asked if they found the gun or any other evidence linking the defendant to the murder and he said no. The only other witness was a "street worker" who refused to say what she saw to the detective.
The state prosecuting attorney gave her closing arguments and asked us to find the defendant guilty based on the testimonies and evidence presented. She really played on our emotions by talking about how young the victim was and talking about his mother and his child with T.
The defense attorney's closing argument was that there was no evidence and that there was reasonable doubt to find his client not guilty.
After the case was over, we were read the charges and brought back to the jury room. All electronic devices taken away and we were left to deliberate. The charges were (in my words) felony homicide, party to a homicide, having a gun and being there at the scene of the crime. We had to decide guilty or not guilty to each of these charges.
We started by taking a vote to see where everyone stood. The majority thought the defendant was guilty. Those that felt he was not guilty explained that there was no hard evidence. There was only the testimonies which were not totally credible. After that discussion the vote was 10 not guilty to 2 guilty. The two women that thought he was guilty were feeling emotional about it. They really wanted to believe the testimonies we heard and felt that the testimonies were enough for them to convict the defendant. After two hours of going back and forth, we were exhausted and felt like we were at a stand still. At that point we had only been deliberating for three hours so it had not been very long. He told the judge and the judge told the attorneys to see if they wanted to make any changes to the charges or to give the defendant a chance to make a deal. Nothing happened so we went back to deliberate for an hour or two without a resolution. They let us go home.
Day 5 - When we arrived one of the jurors who said he was guilty had changed her mind. She said she would feel bad about sending the defendant to jail if he really did not commit the crime. The other juror would not budge. She said she believed the testimonies and the defendant was guilty. About an hour after we all worked to convince her I used an analogy placing one of the witnesses as her fiancé/husband to be. (During the trial she's had talked about wanting to be married.) I asked her if the witness was her fiancé and had lied on the stand the way he did, would she marry him. She said she would not. I asked her why she would send a man to jail then. She couldn't argue with that and conceded. We found the defendant not guilty of all charges. We returned to the courtroom to hear the reading of the verdict. The courtroom was more full than it had ever been. All the witnesses were there and probably the victim and defendant's families. I think the judge had spoken to them and told them not to react when the verdict was read because no one or made a sound. The defense attorney and the defendants both had their heads down the whole time. I avoided eye contact with anyone. I just felt nervous about the whole thing. After the verdict was read the jury was asked if we wanted to talk to the lawyers. We said we did. We explained to them why we came to the not guilty verdict. They told us about some things that couldn't be said in court like the victim was a gang member and the defendant had been charged with hurting a female who had dated his brother. Regardless, the whole jury felt fine about our decision.
Afterward we were escorted out of the building through an underground exit. I think it was so we could avoid anyone that was in the courtroom. I saw some of the people that had been in the courtroom anyway. I hadn't felt nervous but leaving through that exit made me feel afraid. I put my head down and sprinted to my car. I was so glad it was over.
Day 1- I'll start with jury selection. Everyone sign in then names are called for the jury pool for each trial that day. Each jury pool has 36 people. Once I was picked for a jury pool I was given a number and lined up with the other jurors. We were told that we would be called by our jury number and not our name during jury selection.
First we were given the name of the defendant and told the date and the nature of the case. The defendant was accused of murdering the victim and October 2008. Then jury selection began. During jury selection we were asked a number of questions including these:
Do you know or have ever heard of the defendant or the victim?
You know anyone related to this trial, the judge, the lawyers, or anyone else in this courtroom?
You know anyone that works for the blank county courthouse?
Have you ever had a memorable experience, good or bad, with a police officer that you remember?
Do you know where the (poor black) area of town is?
Do you have a sibling? Has your sibling ever stood up for you for you for your sibling?
Do you have any children?
If you ever witnessed or been the victim of a violent crime?
Do you know anyone else in the jury pool?
If you ever served on a jury? Were you the foreman?
Is there any reason you may not be able to serve on this jury?
Is there any reason you think you cannot give the defendant a fair trial?
They asked more questions but I don't remember them. They split us up a few times and we had a long lunch break. The whole process took from 10am-7pm. The chosen jury consisted of 14 women (two alternates). Once we are chosen, we were taken into a room behind the court room and given instructions about returning the next day.
Day 2- On the first day of the trial, prosecuting attorney opened her case with the statement "Yo baby's daddy's gonna die today." This is what the defendant allegedly said to the victim's baby's mama. The prosecuting attorney, describes the case as a situation where the victim was shot because he had an argument with the defendant's brother. The victim had a baby with T and when he was away at jail, T started dating the defendant's brother. When the victim returned from jail him and T got back together. The defendant's brother called T and him and the victim got into an argument over her. A day later 2 men in hoodies approached the victim and 2 friends as they were walking down the street and shot at them. The victim died from gunshot wounds in the hospital a day later. One of the friends was shot in the hand. The other was grazed by a bullet in his stomach. A day after the victim died, T went to the police and told them what the defendant said to her the morning of the shooting and identified him in a photo lineup.
The defense declined to make an opening testimony.
The first person the prosecuting attorney called to the stand was the victim's mother. She asked the mother about her son and held up a large photo of him smiling for us to see. It was really hard not to cry during her testimony. She was very emotional. The victim was only 17 years old.
Next up T, the baby mama, was called to the stand. At the time of the crime she was only 16 years old. She was asked about what the defendant said to her and her relationship with the defendants brother. She said that she had the victim's baby in May. He was not present because he was in jail. She lied on the stand saying he was in school at the time. The defense attorney called her out on it later. They did not want us to know that's where he had been because we may have used that against him so I think she was confused about what to say. We were asked to disregard the information about him being in jail. In June she started "hooking up" with the defendant's brother. She said she witnessed the phone argument between the victim and the defendant's brother. She also said she told the victim what the defendant said to her that morning and he said he didn't care. He said, "If I die, I die."
Next up were the two witnesses that with the victim when he was killed. The first witness said that originally he did not want to cooperate with the police because he did not want to be a snitch. He perjured himself on the stand by telling the defense attorney that he did not want to cooperate with the police then admitting to lying about it. Also, he looked like he was high on drugs. The defense attorney asked him if he was on any medication and he said no. He testified that the shooters were wearing hoodies and he could not see their faces well. He also testified that he identified the defendant in a picture lineup a month after the crime.
The second witness testified that he was not able to see the shooters clearly because they had hoodies on. He also stated that he did not identify the defendant in a line up until 2012 - four years after the crime. He was very emotional. He admitted to having been in jail and said he did not want to send anyone there but he had to be honest about what he saw because he wanted to honor his dead friend and his friend's mother. The highlight of his testimony was when he told us that he'd received a call from a girl saying that the defendant was looking for him to kill him. The witness was upset because the investigator called the girl his girlfriend. He explained that the girl was not his girlfriend. She was just someone he fu$ked in his homeboy's bathroom once. I had to hold in my laughter.
Day 3 -They showed us bullet casings that were found on the scene. There was a ballistics expert interviewed. No fingerprints were found on the casings. The County coroner was interviewed. They showed us photos of the victim's body at the corner's office. Details were given on the number of bullet wounds and how the bullets entered and exited the body. That was hard to look at.
Day 4- The Investigating detective took the stand and talked about his involvement in the case. Because the victim was alive when the crime was reported, he did not get involved until it was ruled as a homicide after the death of the victim two days later. He stated that there were no other suspects. The detective interviewed the defendant after he spoke to his brother. They would not allow us to see a tape of the interview because the detective made references to the defendant being guilty on the tape. He was asked why he did not charge the defendant with the prime until four years later. He said he was waiting for more evidence. The defense attorney pulled out of him that he was moving to a new job a few months later and was trying to close cases. He was asked if they found the gun or any other evidence linking the defendant to the murder and he said no. The only other witness was a "street worker" who refused to say what she saw to the detective.
The state prosecuting attorney gave her closing arguments and asked us to find the defendant guilty based on the testimonies and evidence presented. She really played on our emotions by talking about how young the victim was and talking about his mother and his child with T.
The defense attorney's closing argument was that there was no evidence and that there was reasonable doubt to find his client not guilty.
After the case was over, we were read the charges and brought back to the jury room. All electronic devices taken away and we were left to deliberate. The charges were (in my words) felony homicide, party to a homicide, having a gun and being there at the scene of the crime. We had to decide guilty or not guilty to each of these charges.
We started by taking a vote to see where everyone stood. The majority thought the defendant was guilty. Those that felt he was not guilty explained that there was no hard evidence. There was only the testimonies which were not totally credible. After that discussion the vote was 10 not guilty to 2 guilty. The two women that thought he was guilty were feeling emotional about it. They really wanted to believe the testimonies we heard and felt that the testimonies were enough for them to convict the defendant. After two hours of going back and forth, we were exhausted and felt like we were at a stand still. At that point we had only been deliberating for three hours so it had not been very long. He told the judge and the judge told the attorneys to see if they wanted to make any changes to the charges or to give the defendant a chance to make a deal. Nothing happened so we went back to deliberate for an hour or two without a resolution. They let us go home.
Day 5 - When we arrived one of the jurors who said he was guilty had changed her mind. She said she would feel bad about sending the defendant to jail if he really did not commit the crime. The other juror would not budge. She said she believed the testimonies and the defendant was guilty. About an hour after we all worked to convince her I used an analogy placing one of the witnesses as her fiancé/husband to be. (During the trial she's had talked about wanting to be married.) I asked her if the witness was her fiancé and had lied on the stand the way he did, would she marry him. She said she would not. I asked her why she would send a man to jail then. She couldn't argue with that and conceded. We found the defendant not guilty of all charges. We returned to the courtroom to hear the reading of the verdict. The courtroom was more full than it had ever been. All the witnesses were there and probably the victim and defendant's families. I think the judge had spoken to them and told them not to react when the verdict was read because no one or made a sound. The defense attorney and the defendants both had their heads down the whole time. I avoided eye contact with anyone. I just felt nervous about the whole thing. After the verdict was read the jury was asked if we wanted to talk to the lawyers. We said we did. We explained to them why we came to the not guilty verdict. They told us about some things that couldn't be said in court like the victim was a gang member and the defendant had been charged with hurting a female who had dated his brother. Regardless, the whole jury felt fine about our decision.
Afterward we were escorted out of the building through an underground exit. I think it was so we could avoid anyone that was in the courtroom. I saw some of the people that had been in the courtroom anyway. I hadn't felt nervous but leaving through that exit made me feel afraid. I put my head down and sprinted to my car. I was so glad it was over.
This discussion has been closed.
Re: My jury duty experience
DS born 6/2013