Laura Babcock Murder Trial 12.07.17 - Charge to the Jury - Day 1

[DeaconBrodie]

Are the jurors allowed to discuss the case amongst themselves while they’re on breaks throughout the trial? I guess I’m wondering if its possible they all know roughly where each other stands at this point? I’m not sure why, but I was under the impression they weren’t allowed to discuss until deliberations.

And if not, can they even comment to each other, like for instance... “wow, that DM is a jerk isn’t he?”

TIA for any clarification...I know nothing about serving on a jury!

Jurors are prohibited from discussing the case until they begin their deliberations. This is so that the do not make any decisions until all of the evidence is in and they have heard the judge's instructions.

 

[Grey-St]

Code says that the fact that Babcock is calling around, looking for a place to stay before she died, says something about her state of mind.
by Adam Carter 1:27 PM

Code says that the jury has to bear in mind the limitations of this sort of evidence -- they didn't hear anything directly from Babcock. He also stresses that the evidence about Babcock's lifestyle can't be used to infer that she wasn't worthy of protection. "All persons are entitled to the protection of the rule of law," he says.
by Adam Carter 1:31 PM

He again mentions taking this in context. "Are you sick of hearing me say that yet?" Code says.
by Adam Carter 1:32 PM

BBM. Umm... I would love to know if the Judge really just said that!

 

[BettyCooper]

I've been able to follow this case closely thanks to all of you & your posts. There's been lots of yelling at my screen (in both agreement & disagreement) but I've got so much to say on this trial I finally gave in & registered. First off, I just want to give thanks to Meterclicks, Kamille & everyone else who kept us updated all along & to all the posters who've shared such insightful arguments. Of course, I feel absolutely terrible for the Babcock family & what they're going through right now. It must be completely gut wrenching to sit there day after to day listening to all of this. At least they were lucky enough to have Justice Code. I think he's doing such a good job. I was hoping he'd address certain issues in his charge (re: DM's inferences of not calling certain witnesses & TD's unfounded comments about convicted one's own son or daughter). Thankfully, he did so almost immediately. I'm looking forward to following the rest of his charge &, hopefully, applauding a conviction.

 

[5150]

BBM. Umm... I would love to know if the Judge really just said that!

I hope not- would that be grounds for mistrial if not corrected? Certainly grounds for appeal.

 

[Grey-St]

I hope not- would that be grounds for mistrial if not corrected? Certainly grounds for appeal.

Yes! that's what I'm concerned about. :facepalm:

 

[Alice Ramnit]

Given that the one juror had to be in Europe for family event on Dec 22nd, you’d think they’d sit the weekend and get right into deliberations?

JMO

Maybe they already know that the deliberations won't be taking too long?

 

[Shaz14]

I hope not- would that be grounds for mistrial if not corrected? Certainly grounds for appeal.

According to the law though she has still been declared dead, otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to charge DM and MS with murder. I don’t think what the judge said would lead to an appeal. I’m not an expert but that is how I interpret the situation.

 

[Nosey Parker]

I've been able to follow this case closely thanks to all of you & your posts. There's been lots of yelling at my screen (in both agreement & disagreement) but I've got so much to say on this trial I finally gave in & registered. First off, I just want to give thanks to Meterclicks, Kamille & everyone else who kept us updated all along & to all the posters who've shared such insightful arguments. Of course, I feel absolutely terrible for the Babcock family & what they're going through right now. It must be completely gut wrenching to sit there day after to day listening to all of this. At least they were lucky enough to have Justice Code. I think he's doing such a good job. I was hoping he'd address certain issues in his charge (re: DM's inferences of not calling certain witnesses & TD's unfounded comments about convicted one's own son or daughter). Thankfully, he did so almost immediately. I'm looking forward to following the rest of his charge &, hopefully, applauding a conviction.

So glad you decided to join in, BettyCooper. I agree with all your thoughts, but especially about Justice Code. I think the jury is also lucky to have him. Such a gent!

 

[Grey-St]

The second exception of the hearsay rule is adoption of one accused of a second person's statement.
by Adam Carter 1:02 PM

This is only allowed in limited circumstances, Code says.
by Adam Carter 1:02 PM

Can anyone help me out here? I'm having a bit of trouble understanding the second hearsay rule, and the examples Justice Code gave.

DeaconBrodie? Lol

 

[5150]

According to the law though she has still been declared dead, otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to charge DM and MS with murder. I don’t think what the judge said would lead to an appeal. I’m not an expert but that is how I interpret the situation.

However one of the tweets from this morning 11.21 am the judge says "

• This case is based on circumstantial evidence," Code says. The biggest issues, he says, are whether the Crown has proved Babcock is dead, and whether or not Millard and Smich killed her.
  
  • These are issues that have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt," Code says.
    
  
  Seems like he is telling Jury that death must be proven, him referring to her death would be a big no no IMO
  

 

[ab-initio]

Are the jurors allowed to discuss the case amongst themselves while they’re on breaks throughout the trial? I guess I’m wondering if its possible they all know roughly where each other stands at this point? I’m not sure why, but I was under the impression they weren’t allowed to discuss until deliberations.

And if not, can they even comment to each other, like for instance... “wow, that DM is a jerk isn’t he?”

TIA for any clarification...I know nothing about serving on a jury!

I doubt they can sit over coffee and commiserate, but I think it is fair to assume that after sitting beside these peers for 5 weeks for hours on end, you pick up on subtleties in body language.

I have never served on a jury, but as someone who is pretty intune to my surroundings, I surmise that I'd be able to go into deliberations knowing where each person stands/leans, before discussion, with a pretty strong percentage of accuracy.

 

[Jasper52]

BBM. Umm... I would love to know if the Judge really just said that!

Lisa Hepfner tweeted this;

"Laura Babcock sought treatment for mental health issues and spoke to numerous witnesses about her state of mind. Both crown and defence rely on these statements, but for different reasons. Crown says #LauraBabcock was vulnerable, especially to #Millard"

 

[ab-initio]

BBM. Umm... I would love to know if the Judge really just said that!

Good catch. Eek.

 

[Shaz14]

Can anyone help me out here? I'm having a bit of trouble understanding the second hearsay rule, and the examples Justice Code gave.

DeaconBrodie? Lol

My understanding is that it is when a statement is made about one accused, and the other accused was either present and was aware of what was going on, and in on it, or at least not stopping it? It is used in the case where both accused were involved. He used the example of Meneses saying that one of the two accused told her to stay in the car. Both accused were there so in a sense both accused therefore told her to stay in the car, especially since one didn’t object when the other one said it.

That may have confused you more....

 

[JPC]

I doubt they can sit over coffee and commiserate, but I think it is far to assume that after sitting beside these peers for 5 weeks for hours on end, you pick up on subtleties in body language.

I have never served on a jury, but as someone who is pretty intune to my surroundings, I surmise that I'd be able to go into deliberations knowing where each person stands/leans, before discussion, with a pretty strong percentage of accuracy.

When I attended this trial I definitely watched how different jurors reacted to testimony including taking notes, leaning in or back, shifting in their seats, playing with hair or staring blankly ahead.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BettyCooper]

I believe he means that a statement which would normally be excluded as hearsay can still be admissible if the accused then uses it in their own narrative.

 

[Grey-St]

According to the law though she has still been declared dead, otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to charge DM and MS with murder. I don’t think what the judge said would lead to an appeal. I’m not an expert but that is how I interpret the situation.

I'm going to try and look this up, but I don't think this is true. I think she can be declared dead after this trial. I think LE can lay murder charges on the presumption of death, when a body is not recovered.

 

[Shaz14]

However one of the tweets from this morning 11.21 am the judge says "

• This case is based on circumstantial evidence," Code says. The biggest issues, he says, are whether the Crown has proved Babcock is dead, and whether or not Millard and Smich killed her.
  
  • These are issues that have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt," Code says.
    
  
  Seems like he is telling Jury that death must be proven, him referring to her death would be a big no no IMO
  

I totally see where you’re coming from. I’m just not sure if it would lead to an appeal since it is a technicality that I believe could be argued either way. We might know better after we hear what the jury are actually allowed to convict them of. IMO

 

[Jasper52]

I must say, I feel really sorry for the two jurors that will be dismissed come time for deliberations. I remember how hard it was for the dismissed jurors in the TB trial. They never had closure.

 

[Gloria77]

I must say, I feel really sorry for the two jurors that will be dismissed come time for deliberations. I remember how hard it was for the dismissed jurors in the TB trial. They never had closure.

Hi Jasper52, why are they being dismissed?