GlitchWizard said:
I hope he has money for a good attorney. The system is all messed up for police officers, just as much as it is for the rest of us....and even though he didn't do anything wrong - there are many people out there for his blood right now. (The family of the guy he shot, and everyone within ear shot of them who thinks it was racially motivated.) I hope he gets, not just a fair trial, but one that exonorates him.
The people I worry about on the jury are the sympathetic ones. They're just oh so sad for the family, and friends, and he was a wonderful kid, and he shouldn't have died just for stealling a car - everyone makes mistakes, and his family is in so much pain, it'd just be nice to help them get some closure....
They're not bad people, and not the reverse racists - they just are thinking with their emotions, responding to another person's pain - but they don't think about reality, and how someone else has to pay for their decision, and the facts of the case just don't matter as much as that feeling that somehow the kid could have been saved, and the police should have known how to do that - it's their jobs! Nice people - but you sure don't want to be on the wrong side of wherever their emotions land! And they don't belong on a jury.
A lot of very bad verdicts have come from this type of juror, especially against someone they see as 'the man' - a big company, a rich doctor... or a police officer. That's where a bunch of money was given in the silicone breast implant trials - with no evidence that the implants did anything at all bad (and to this day, there is no evidence linking them to any diseases).
Or, there was the case a friend of my mom's was involved in... a doctor invited everyone he worked with to a party on his yacht. There they were, having fun.... but this one nurse went and was drinking a bit much. So, they tried to cut her off, but she managed to get her hands on even more alcohol. So, they put her in a room below when she passed out, and figured she would be OK. She slipped out of the room, and jumped over the side of the boat. They rescued her, took care of her - but she still had some paralysis, so she sued the doctor. Such a sad story - she was a wonderful woman, and now she could never walk again, could never be a nurse again - shouldn't this doctor, who has more than enough money, pay some part of her massive bills and lifelong care? So - the jury goes in to deliberate, and the first thing the foreman says is, "So, how much should we give her?" No question of was the doctor at fault, just pure sympathy for this nurse. My mom's friend holds them up to do a vote first on if they should give her anything - she's the sole holdout. Every person on that jury wasn't concerned about if the doctor was really at fault, just that this poor person was hurt and needed help, and they, on the jury, could give that help. Well, having a holdout meant they had to think about that issue - and everyone realized when discussing it that there wasn't a single place they felt the doctor, nor anyone else, had been negligent. They came back with the verdict of "Not Guilty" for the doctor.
A long story, but that, and these other cases are why I really am scared when I see one of these emotional type cases going to a jury. If there isn't someone on that jury, and all it takes is one, who will stand up for the facts, some very, very bad verdicts can come down and punish innocent people. I really hope Ray has at least one coldhearted, factual person on his jury.