Anyone been on a jury for a murder trial?

In My Humble Opinion
41

I was the foreman on a jury for a very serious crime that was almost murder.

The defendant was charged with:

  1. Breaking without entering with the intention to commit assault.

  2. Assault with the intention to commit great bodily harm.

  3. Sexual assault of the …something degree

Basically, he had entered a house, beaten up the man who was there, and took a broken broom stick and raped him anally with it, tearing the insides of the man up a lot. The victim is on a colostomy bag forever.

The evidence for the first two charges was overwhelming. However, while I believe he is entirely guilty of all three charges, other jurors felt bad for him and couldn’t convict him on the sexual assault charge.

I read the verdict to him in court. The first two charges amounted to 20 years without parole, so he was clearly on edge when we re-entered the court room.

I stood up, read the first verdict, and when I said, “Guilty…”, he stood up and said, “What?”

His lawyers had to pull him back down in his chair(he sat back down). When I read the second “guilty”, he stood up again and the baliffs began to approach him to settle him down. The judge ordered that he remain seated(I guess we don’t rise to hear our verdict in Michigan).

Anyway, by the time I said, “not guilty” on the third charge, he was fuming so much, he barely heard me.

Anyway, it was pretty exhausting, but cool.

42

Not sure about other states but the law in NC says the jury must be “death qualified” for a death penalty case. That means you can’t be against the DP and be on the jury.

43

In Ohio, through the processing informally known as Witherspooning (named after the case which spells out the procedure), the court must be satisfied that the jury is prepared to at least consider imposing a death sentence for a case in which it is provided as an option by law. The reasoning is, just as it would be unfair to the defense to have a juror who would want to impose a death sentence no matter what, so too would it be unfair to the prosecution to have a juror who would not impose the death penalty under any circumstances, even where legally available.

44

In Ohio, through what is informally known as Witherspooning (named after the case which spells out the procedure), the court must be satisfied that the jury is willing to at least consider imposing a death sentence in a case in which it is an option by law. Each juror is questioned individually by the judge and the lawyers, away from the other jurors, as to his or her views on the death penalty. A juror who is absolutely and sincerely opposed to the death penalty (usually due to religious or moral objections) will invariably be excused; someone who is opposed to it but could bring herself to impose it where the facts of the case justified it after a finding of guilt, may remain on the jury.

The reasoning is, just as it would be unfair to the defense to have a juror who would want to impose a death sentence no matter what, so too would it be unfair to the prosecution to have a juror who would not impose the death penalty under any circumstances, even where legally available and justified.

45

Last year I was on a jury for a murder trial - a 24-year old drunken man got his pickup stuck in the snow (in February in Minnesota) at 3 AM, went to the closest farm house, took their shotgun, and shot the mother, father, and 10-year old son. The mother survived but lost her right arm, while the father and son died. They tracked the killer to his house, since he stole the family’s truck, got that stuck in the snow, and then stole the neighbor’s truck and drove it to his home ten miles away.

The trial was moved from two counties away to my county, and they brought their own judge and court reporters and bailiffs. The questionaire was about six pages long, asking for occupation (and of your spouse and siblings), criminal records, organizations you belong to, etc., and a list of the witnesses to see if you knew any of them.

I was the last of the 15 jurors selected (and became one of the alternates). The selection process started on Monday, and I was selected on Thursday. They had about 150 on the call sheet, and I was number 75 or so. One of the biggest questions was could you be impartial if are shown a picture of the dead boy’s body. (Other questions were related to if you had financial resources for the duration of the trial.)

The trial lasted about two weeks, and our case had very few objections, delays, or surprises. The prosecutor presented the case carefully, so that part was fascinating. The defense (court-assigned, though we didn’t know that) didn’t call any witnesses.

After the trial ended at 3:00 PM, the rest of the jury spent one night in a hotel - no reading material or TV or radio, just “go to sleep”. We three alternates went to have a drink, then met back at the courtroom where we met and talked to the family members and the attorneys on both sides. That part was very emotional and interesting, since they wanted to know what we thought. The case was pretty open-and-shut, so being an alternate was probably more fun (?). The next morning we went back to the courtroom to await the verdict. After the jury returned the eleven guilty verdicts, I went home and cried.

46

No they aren’t

No they don’t

I was the foreman on a murder trial. This guy was a scumbag and killed a guy who was working on a car, as near as I can tell, just cause he was there.
The selection process was long, but OK. No written on this one ( I have had written questionnaires on other jury selections)
Testimony was fairly straight forward.
The jury discussions were unusual. We had one person that could not apply logic and then reach and stick with a decision. (a college professor. Go figure)
So we crammed 1 days worth of jury deliberations into 4 days. :rolleyes:
In the end, we convicted the dirtbag of 2nd degree murder. We had a choice of 1st or 2nd, premeditation was the difference. I was going for 1st, but after 4 days I was willing to compromise if it got us done (it did)