A lone juror.
I once served on a jury in Detroit.
It was a case involving a guy who ran a drug house.
The charge was "Felon in Possession of a Firearm".
There were no witnesses testifying that they had seen him with a gun.
The trial was chaotic. It seemed that there was another defendant who had turn states evidence, but fled that morning.
We did not know that and could not be told.
The prosecutor looked lost. He didn't no what to do.
He had lost his key witness.
finally, at a critical juncture the judge (a highly respected federal judge) actually gave advice to the prosecutor from the bench.
I immediately recognized the impropriety of that, but the case went on.
Finally it came to deliberations.
Eleven of us were voting for aquittal.
One guy held his ground.
He annoyed all of us.
He insisted that the cops wouldn't have brought the case if there wasn't one. Cops don't lie.
That seemed ridiculous to the rest of us.
But we were hung.
Finally, I asked the foreman to send a note to the judge asking for the definition of possession.
It came back saying that if we had reasonable belief that even if the defendant didn't know where the gun was in the house, he could send someone to get it for him.
Duh.
We then found him guilty of possession.
The judge did something remarkable.
He invited the jury into his chambers with the prosecutor, The DEA agent, and the defense counsel (a pro bono lawyer).
The judge asked if we had any questions.
I did.
I asked the prosecutor if this was his first case.
He laughed and said no.
The judge explained that the co-defendant had skipped (we didn't know) and that he was to testify that he saw the defendant with the gun.
The DEA guy said that their undercover agent couldn't testify or his cover would be blown and he'd be useless in the future, if not dead.
I asked the judge if it was proper to coach from the bench and he laughed and said no, but the circumstances were extraordinary.
I turned to the defense lawyer (who actually looked like a well known comedian, Avery Schreiber) and asked if the judge's coaching gave him grounds for a retrial.
He said "Of course! But I'm, not gonna tell that scumbag. Let him figure it out in prison."
So that one lone juror kept the rest of us from giving the wrong verdict.
Sort of like 12 Angry Men.
I served on a DUI jury. It ended in a mistrial, with one juror that just couldn't put the pieces together and realize a crime was committed. I don't know if they tried the woman again, but in my mind, she was guilty.
ReplyDeleteSome people should not be allowed on juries.
DeleteI was on a jury where one juror insisted the defendant was not guilty of smuggling narcotics into jail because he was only there because he was arrested. This juror maintained the cops brought in the drugs.
ReplyDeleteAmazing.
DeleteI still can't figure out how that is "possession." My husband served on a jury hung up by one woman, a middle aged black woman who did not want to send another black man to prison. All his victims were black. It was clear he had intimidated some who would not testify. It was clear he was a scumbag. Multiple babies by multiple women, collecting their aid checks. You can't convict a man for being a scumbag, but one of the jurors noodled on the problem all evening and came in the next day with a timeline of verifiable events presented at trial that placed the scumbag at the crime scene. The holdout changed her vote. The DA doing his job well could have saved a lot of time.
ReplyDeleteBAYSIDER
It was possession because he had control of the weapon by proxy.
ReplyDeleteHe could demand it be brought to him.
BTW, the undercover agent who could not testify, saw him playing with it.