2011.05.14 - Sidebar Thread (Juror Selection Day Six)

[lowens1975]

Baez wants to get rid of the two who had a previous run in with the law but failed to put it on their questionnaire. Whoopee! I disagree with that. BOTH these PJ's answered truthfully when asked and I didn't hear any hesitations. His own client has never admitted even the slightest hint at being responsible for her own child's death. Does he think SHE would be 'honest' and write it down?

 

[ynotdivein]

Can someone give me a quick synopsis on DUI guy? I had to miss yesterday and missed him while frantically skimming to catch up... :banghead:. TIA!!! :tyou:

 

[Amster]

The last witness was not a juvenile when he was arrested for pot. He was 19-20

 

[Insomnia Momma]

If Pot Juror was only 22 and he was arrested in 2004 for this he was only 15 or 16 when this happened depending on his birthday :waitasec:

I thought juvie records were always sealed?

 

[darnudes]

It think Baez is trying every dirty tactic to try and trip people up.

I really hate what the defense is doing in trying to lay traps for the jurors re the age/mitigation question. No wonder Judge Perry had to intervene to point out what the law required, but the defense already knew this had tried it before and is still trying to do it....very dirty.

 

[Rallihanna]

If the pot charge was 2 years ago... and he's 22 now... well in 2004 (SA just mentioned it) he would have been 15. So not sure that would really be relevant. Maybe why they didn't pursue it?

 

[nursebeeme]

when is jose going to get it.... that the judge would not have to step in if he phrased the question and provided the law????

hardly "rehabilitation of the juror" it is more like:

rehabilitation of the lawyer

moo

 

[Softail]

I'm so sick of JB accusing others of lying. How hypocritical. :maddening:

 

[jmfstl]

I have a question. Does this mean that the questioning of the "9" are now done. Or do the defense and SA again get a chance to question them. If they don't then are they sworn in and shipped off to Orlando? Thanks in advance if anyone has an answer.

 

[21merc7]

I see that a lot of folks didn't like this boy - I actually did cause I suspect the pot charge was a juvie record. This boy sounds pretty young. Is a pot charge a criminal charge in the US for personal use? We only have that for possession with the intention to sell. The rest of our time is spent busting grow-ops.

Yes, but it is only a misdemeanor if it is a small amount, say 1 joint. I am uncertain about California though, they have been or already allow for medical use.

ETA: Only speaking for the state I live in, don't know about Florida or California, or any other, lol.

 

[ynotdivein]

Did somebody say "mimosa"????

http://www.bwedexclusive.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/mimosa.jpg

 

[lowens1975]

I see that a lot of folks didn't like this boy - I actually did cause I suspect the pot charge was a juvie record. This boy sounds pretty young. Is a pot charge a criminal charge in the US for personal use? We only have that for possession with the intention to sell. The rest of our time is spent busting grow-ops.

yes, it is.

 

[BeanE]

This is a temporary link to a PDF file of the tweets for this phase of jury selection, days 4, 5, and 6 (today) through the current courtroom break.

Please note the button in the lower right corner when you open the file. This makes the print bigger for us old folks.

http://tweetbook.in/store/BeanEWebs...rite-Bookbf4893c95821ec6da2f565787c5ab88d.pdf

I'll try to generate another file during another break, and then I'll definitely generate one at the end of the day today.

The remarks from the reporters today are precious.

 

[Amster]

If Pot Juror was only 22 and he was arrested in 2004 for this he was only 15 or 16 when this happened depending on his birthday :waitasec:

I thought juvie records were always sealed?

It did not happen in 2004. The PJ said 2-3 years ago. He was asked if he lived in Fla. in 2004. No follow-up to why he was asked.

 

[zoey]

I see that a lot of folks didn't like this boy - I actually did cause I suspect the pot charge was a juvie record. This boy sounds pretty young. Is a pot charge a criminal charge in the US for personal use? We only have that for possession with the intention to sell. The rest of our time is spent busting grow-ops.

Again...to me personally---not a big thing--I don't consider it anything major like having a child "missing" and not reporting it for 31 days, stealing money from family members, knowing how to use bank routing numbers and get money, etc a wee bit more.....
I'm also thinking he was a minor and thought it was removed or whatever--don't think it was intentional....I really don't....he seemed respectful of laws and very polite

 

[logicalgirl]

I loved loved loved the way HHJP kept pointing out the jurors who said they think ICA is guilty are the ones the DT wanted back on recall. That was too funny!
At least I didn't need to get up and start my lunges yet while Finnell was up. But I suppose we will have time for that - sigh.

 

[Chiquita71]

Baez wants to get rid of the two who had a previous run in with the law but failed to put it on their questionnaire. Whoopee! I disagree with that. BOTH these PJ's answered truthfully when asked and I didn't hear any hesitations. His own client has never admitted even the slightest hint at being responsible for her own child's death. Does he think SHE would be 'honest' and write it down?

QuoteRespect lowens :yes:
BBM

ITA. and Thank you for saying better, what I was wanting to express. Here, in the question phase, these jurors are getting grilled on things that Casey will be on trial for...

Jose is using the same process to weed out the jurors as the SA will to show that Casey is guilty, the very things that MAKE "you" think she is guilty. Does that make sense? :waitasec:

:waiting: for the penalty phase.

 

[darnudes]

if Jose Baez is waiting for the "perfect juror" to walk in he will be waiting a loooong time. He also needs to learn how to speak to people who are not lawyers...

the age thing/the way they asked the question has been to the detriment of two very good pj's imhoo

Baez has an extremely convoluted way of speaking - I've often wondered if it is a window into his disorganised mind. Baez better pick up his game for the trial but personally I think he's incapable of doing it - he's not an articulate guy and is in fact an incredibly poor orator.

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

Baez wants to get rid of the two who had a previous run in with the law but failed to put it on their questionnaire. Whoopee! I disagree with that. BOTH these PJ's answered truthfully when asked and I didn't hear any hesitations. His own client has never admitted even the slightest hint at being responsible for her own child's death. Does he think SHE would be 'honest' and write it down?

I think it also points to a flaw or ambiguity in the questionnaire itself - I'm not sure how I would answer those questions if I were in either of the two prospective jurors situations. IIRC our questionnaire in my jurisdiction is a little more specific

 

[logicalgirl]

Can someone give me a quick synopsis on DUI guy? I had to miss yesterday and missed him while frantically skimming to catch up... :banghead:. TIA!!! :tyou:

He was the musician/maintenance newly retired guy who had a DUI a few years ago, did community service but did not report it on form. Also writes crime reviews and has bought a bit of crime memorabilia on ebay. He actually sounded like an interesting guy - recently retired. Baez had a field day with him.
edited to add - THAT may have been the Perry Mason Moment Baez has been waiting for. LOL