One of my friends is doing jury duty. He can’t talk about it, but its a big case in a small world. I read the newspaper every day and case is on the front page every day. From what I have read, they are seeing every child porn pic this guy had on his comp. My friend is drinking a lot and we can’t talk because he’s on the jury.
I do agree that if I ever have to be be tried in court, I’d want all the evidence to be shown. I think that its terrible unfair for my friend to have to look at those pictures and have to take notes so that he can remember which offense is being judged for which pic.
What are your thoughts? Why should my friend have to deal with this?
I would say the defendant is being tried for a number of specific crimes relating to the evidence, and the jury has to see all that relate to the trial. What it comes down to is that the prosecutor thinks it is germane to getting a conviction.
Being on a jury can be rough. Murder trial jurors often have to look at really grisly crime-scene photographs. Rape trial jurors have to hear horrible graphic details of sexual assault. It’s a cost of doing business.
Some people are too sensitive to cope with the nasty, graphic, explicit, coarse details of some criminal evidence. They probably should have been excluded during the selection process. Don’t the attorneys and judge usually ask questions regarding the prospective jurors’ ability to examine unpleasant evidence?
When I was on a grand jury I had several cases where we were shown child pornography, both still images and video. And not just naked images, but graphic sexual stuff. It was one of the most disturbing things I’ve ever seen. I’m sorry your friend has to see all that.
Haven’t you answered your own question? The jury decides the case. To decide the case, they have to review all of the evidence. The judge cannot do that for them, since it is not the judge who decides the case.
Am I really the first in this thread to comment on that? Do you mean, like, serious drinking a lot? And do you mean to imply that your friend has just begun drinking a lot as a result of the unpleasantness of sitting on this case? Or has your friend had a drinking problem all along? Is your friend drinking enough to cause some problems, like being drunk in court, or while driving thereto? If it comes to driving a juror to drink, maybe your friend needs to get herself dismissed from this case, and maybe the judge will do so. Maybe your friend should tell the judge about it. (I think if a juror needs to talk to the judge, you’re supposed to send a message via the bailiff or something.)
How else can the jury know that this guy actually had child porn? We can’t just take the word of the investigators. Having to sit through every photo or video does seem extreme and I assume it must be related to the charges somehow.
Do or can they at least blur some of the more sensitive parts of the images? I’d think any viewer/juror could determine beyond the shadow of doubt even with slightly doctored pictures that what they constituted was offensive and illegal.
I don’t have to break my doctor’s arm too for him to understand the severity of my injury.
So make detailed descriptions and ask the defendant to admit that this is what was in his possession. If he denies it then what does showing the pictures help? The prosecution could certainly come up with child porn to show and claim was the defendants. The specific images only seem relevant if the defendant is in them.
Because if I were ever accused of possessing child porn based on images that I knowingly downloaded, I damn well want the opportunity to help the jury understand that the images were not child porn. They can’t do that if they can’t or if they refuse to look at them.
If the defendant admits having the pictures then we don’t really need a jury. If the defendant pleads not guilty then you need to at least show that the pictures are indeed child porn (I think a description may lend itself to being argued away by a defense attorney) and that the pictures came off of that guy’s computer (i.e. a computer person who can verify this).
In drug possession cases, do they force the jury to partake in the goods, so they can be sure what the prosecution has obtained from the defendant is REALLY illegal drugs?
This is ridiculous. A few representative samples, perhaps, is probably enough. I agree that they should be turned to black and white, and the children’s faces/genitals should be censored somehow.
No, but they probably test the drug to make sure it’s not just baking soda. I don’t think a computer can do the same thing in a child porn case. Descriptions are insufficient. I agree, though that a few representative samples should suffice…unless this is related to the charges or the prosecution is really trying to make some point.
I wonder if pixelated/censored pictures would defeat the purpose. Would a censored picture be considered illegal? If not, you may need to prove that the unaltered image was on the computer. I’m only speculating here…
It doesn’t seem like either the prosecution or the defense would benefit from making the jury look through the entire collection, but they all do get to have nightmares afterwards. What prevents the judge, the prosecution and the defense agreeing to show the jury a representative sample of the pictures, with the explanation that there is more but no-one wants to look at it again (except, presumably, the defendant)?
Because he is on the jury and will be voting “guilty” or “not guilty”. If he doesn’t see the evidence, how would he do that? Take the word of the prosecutor?
If your friend has a drinking problem, he probably shouldn’t be on a jury.
Are you arguing in favor of legal representatives making shit up? Or am I completely mis-reading your post? Also, :dubious: at your idea to “make detailed descriptions,” as if mere words can somehow replace videos with sound or even still images.
