I'm starting this blog for 2 reasons- first, my old one was linked to my old email; secondly, I just finished serving 3 days on a jury and it was so much like a soap opera it was easier to tell it all one time and have friends read about it here.
So if you are interested in the trial, read on! If not, check back later- I am going to try to keep up with this better than with the last one!
The jury selection started on Thursday, and we were selected at 2 pm - didn't get to eat lunch till 3 pm - our hunger united the group! At 3:30 we began to hear the first testimony from 2 police officers.
Apparently, or as they say, allegedly, a man (we'll call him Tim) was robbed at gunpoint while he was walking home with his cigarettes and beer. This took place in a low-income area in Houston. One robber held the gun while the other (we'll call him Cole) checked through the pockets of Tim and also made him take his shoes off. Cole took $6 and change, an ID, credit card (that wasn't any good), a SS card, and a food stamp card. The robbers looked at the beer and cigs and didn't take them cuz they were Menthols and not their type. They then left and Tim jogged to the nearby house of his friend- to return the $20 change the friend had loaned him - apparently Tim had 2 $10 bills folded up in the little watch-pocket of his jeans and the robbers didn't find it!
The neighbor told Tim to call the police, so Tim went across the street to his house, put his beer in the fridge, and then called the police.
The police came, drove down the street the robbers had left on, saw Cole, apprehended him, brought him back to Tim, who said that he was the one. None of the stolen evidence was ever found, even though the police searched the area, and the gunman was never apprehended, either.
A little background on Tim - he's served time in prison for robbery of a habitation and 3 DWI's. He said he no long did crack or cocaine, but did smoke a little weed once in a while. ( I couldn't believe he said that on the stand - just admitted it- it was also a surprise to the prosecuting attorney, we found out later.)
Then a few weeks after the alleged robbery, Cole's wife, friend, and a guy named Water (who is now in jail for armed robbery himself) came to Tim and offered $300 if he'd sign an affidavit saying Cole was not the guy- he misidentified him. Tim said he was insulted with the offer of $300 - now if it had been $3000 then he'd do it ( another shocking statement the prosecutor was not expecting!)
Then we heard from Cole's wife saying that he'd been at home with her all evening, and she just got out of the shower and was sending him to the store and she looked at the clock and it was 9:50. (So where was he during the shower????) Problem with her testimony was that the police record showed Cole was in the police car at 9:49. Oh, and she was sending him to the corner store for cigarettes cuz they sell single cigarettes there !!! But apparently she had lied to police before in another incident involving Cole and coke, so we pretty much threw out her testimony.
Let's see- other interesting facts- at the affidavit meeting, the defense attorney was present (misconduct?? stupidity???)
So Friday afternoon we deliberated for about 2 1/2 hours, and 11 of us felt that Cole was probably guilty of the robbery, but we felt that the state did not have enough evidence- we had reasonable doubt, considering the testimony and character of Tim.
But one juror was sure that Tim was telling the truth, that he had 'paid his debt to society' by serving time in prison, so why would he lie? So we told the judge that we were 11 to 1, he said to come back Monday.
So today we came back, and this one lady would not budge in her thinking, she just knew Cole was guilty. It made the rest of us really mad because she wasn't following what the judge said- and what our law says- that someone is innocent until proven by the state beyond all reasonable doubt- the burden is on the state to prove guilt, not on the accused to prove innocence. She just felt he was guilty.
So we ended up with a hung jury- the judge called a mistrial- the prosecutor dropped the case and was not going to retry it- not enough evidence.
It was a fascinating experience to really see how our system works. I did not imagine the weight of the responsibility until I was on the jury ( this was my first time to be actually be chosen). It was also a huge view into a whole different part of society - I am blessed beyond measure!
It was fascinating to talk with the prosecuting attorney afterward and hear that she didn't know some of the stuff her witness was going to say- but she told him to be honest. She could have done some things differently that might have swayed us, but it sounded as if she was overloaded with cases and didn't have a ton of time to prepare.
And the group dynamics of our jury were interesting- we had a 27 year old attorney as our foreman, the rest worked as school administrators, retired teacher, prison guard, (oh yes- the prison guard said that Tim had been one of his inmates - the judge let him stay on the jury), real estate loan ladies, all very nice - except the one!
It was interesting how they took our cell phones away while we were deliberating. It was inteteresting to see the people in the criminal justice building.
So there it all is- probably more than you wanted! Moral of the story- go ahead and answer that jury summons. I'm thankful for our system where the burden is on the prosecutor to prove guilt.
I'm looking forward to not getting up early tomorrow and driving downtown!
