GUILTY NY - Karina Vetrano, 30, jogger found murdered, Queens, 2 Aug 2016 #5 *First trial MISTRIAL*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Rocky1 said:
In some districts the judge selects the foreperson of the jury. In other districts the jurors elect their foreperson and in still other districts the first juror to enter the jury box becomes the foreperson automatically. The judge will inform jurors which method is used in the district.
U.S. District Court • Southern District of New York
Click to expand...
Yeah, I found the same link but that is for federal court.
U.S. District Court • Southern District of New York
Handbook for Trial Jurors
Serving the United States District Court

I researched further and found this link for state courts:
Article 270 | NYS CPL | Jury Trial Formation Conduct of Jury
New York State Law
Criminal Procedure Law
Consolidated Laws of New York's CPL code
S 270.15 Trial jury;examination of prospective jurors; challenges generally.
[...]
The process of jury selection as prescribed
herein shall continue until twelve persons are selected and sworn as
trial jurors. The juror whose name was first drawn and called must be
designated by the court as the foreperson, and no special oath need be
administered to him or her.
[...]
 
Judge denies request to vacate conviction in Karina Vetrano murder trial
[...]
Juror Christopher Gooley testified under cross examination that comments from jury foreman Brian Morrissey were what inspired him to come forward to "tell his story."

Eyewitness News broadcast an exclusive interview with Morrissey the day after the verdict was reached, at which time he told us the verdict was "a slam dunk" for the prosecution.

"I was unhappy he was speaking for us," Gooley said.

Gooley, who is an actor and producer by profession and has an Master of Fine Arts degree, admitted that a guilty verdict "might not look well" to people in the theater community, who view themselves as liberals. He also admitted that he had some concerns that the guilty verdict might hurt his reputation.

His attorney clarified that while the Morrissey interview was a factor in his decision to come forward, it was one of a few factors. Gooley apparently had misgivings moments after the verdict was rendered.
[...]
 
Judge rejects jury misconduct claims in Vetrano murder case
[...]
Defense Attorneys had presented a witness, juror Christopher Gooley, a Broadway producer, who testified that he felt pressured during deliberations and that the jury foreman had prejudged the case.

But prosecutors brought in two other jurors who were not identified by name who directly contradicted much of what Gooley testified about. Prosecutors said they had five other jurors ready to testify and contradict Gooley.
[...]
 
Vetrano family - 3 weeks ago:
Exclusive: Jury foreman on Karina Vetrano verdict - 'It was a slam dunk'
Tuesday, April 2nd, 2019
[...]
"Jubilation, justice," dad Phil Vetrano told reporters while leaving the court. "Justice has been served."

The Vetranos also spoke outside their home on Tuesday. They thanked the jurors and said their anger and bitterness are gone as a result of the conviction.
[...]

Lewis family - today:
Judge Denies Motion On Juror Misconduct In Vetrano Case
April 22, 2019 at 1:31 pm
[...]
Lewis’ family and supporters were irate following the motion’s denial. Lewis’ Mother, Veta Lewis, was extremely animated while speaking to reporters.

“Shame on the judge,” Veta Lewis said. “From Day 1, my son, Chanel Lewis, is innocence … I feel the Vetrano pain because they lost a daughter, but I, too, lost a son and my son is not the killer. But you know what? I will get my reward from the righteous judge up here. God almighty. No sin goes unpunished. The verdict is already reversed in the name of Jesus.”
[...]
 
It seems peculiar that Juror 1 did not testify at the hearing today. o_O
Judge denies motion, sets sentencing in Vetrano case
April 22, 2019
[...]
After about two and a half hours of testimony by three jurors, including two who disputed the claims of misconduct, Justice Michael Aloise denied the defense motion and set sentencing for Tuesday morning.
[...]
Gooley also alleged that the jury foreperson, “Juror 1” said he had his “mind made up” on the second day of trial in violation of Aloise’s directions not to talk about proceedings until after deliberations. In addition, Gooley said Juror 1 tore up a note asking the judge how long they would have to remain at the courthouse the night of deliberations.

Juror 1 did not testify at Monday’s hearing.
[...]
After Gooley signed his sworn affidavit with the Legal Aid defense team, he met with Queens prosecutors — including Executive Assistant District Attorney Bob Masters and ADA Michael Curtis who has worked the Lewis case since February 2017 — at Carle Place Diner in Mineola, Long Island (Gooley ordered a water, diet Coke and toast with butter. The Queens DA’s office picked up the tab).

There, Gooley told the prosecutors that the defense team had mused that Aloise would “throw the motion out the window” like he had done with other motions throughout the case, Leventhal said.

Gooley disputed the exact wording but said that Legal Aid attorneys did say they expected Aloise to deny the motion without calling a hearing.
 
SeesSeas said:
It seems peculiar that Juror 1 did not testify at the hearing today. o_O
Judge denies motion, sets sentencing in Vetrano case
April 22, 2019
[...]
After about two and a half hours of testimony by three jurors, including two who disputed the claims of misconduct, Justice Michael Aloise denied the defense motion and set sentencing for Tuesday morning.
[...]
Gooley also alleged that the jury foreperson, “Juror 1” said he had his “mind made up” on the second day of trial in violation of Aloise’s directions not to talk about proceedings until after deliberations. In addition, Gooley said Juror 1 tore up a note asking the judge how long they would have to remain at the courthouse the night of deliberations.

Juror 1 did not testify at Monday’s hearing.
[...]
After Gooley signed his sworn affidavit with the Legal Aid defense team, he met with Queens prosecutors — including Executive Assistant District Attorney Bob Masters and ADA Michael Curtis who has worked the Lewis case since February 2017 — at Carle Place Diner in Mineola, Long Island (Gooley ordered a water, diet Coke and toast with butter. The Queens DA’s office picked up the tab).

There, Gooley told the prosecutors that the defense team had mused that Aloise would “throw the motion out the window” like he had done with other motions throughout the case, Leventhal said.

Gooley disputed the exact wording but said that Legal Aid attorneys did say they expected Aloise to deny the motion without calling a hearing.
Click to expand...
Maybe Juror 1 was there, but after Gooley impeached himself, and lost credibility, there was no need to continue. I'm not saying that's what happened, but I would think if it mattered that much. Juror 1 would have testified.
It appears to me that by the prosecution requesting the hearing be held, after the defense filed the motion, they did so to clear up any discrepancies that the defense may try to use on appeal.
To me, this was a Hail Mary by the defense. It's uncommon that a judge overturns a verdict one the jury is polled and dismissed. The defense knows this, and so did the prosecution.
 
Rocky1 said:
Maybe Juror 1 was there, but after Gooley impeached himself, and lost credibility, there was no need to continue. I'm not saying that's what happened, but I would think if it mattered that much. Juror 1 would have testified.
It appears to me that by the prosecution requesting the hearing be held, after the defense filed the motion, they did so to clear up any discrepancies that the defense may try to use on appeal.
To me, this was a Hail Mary by the defense. It's uncommon that a judge overturns a verdict one the jury is polled and dismissed. The defense knows this, and so did the prosecution.
Click to expand...
I don't recall that the jury was polled after the verdict was announced. Were the jurors polled?
Unless there is an exception, it appears that the jury will be present in court during sentencing on Tuesday.
2. The separate sentencing proceeding provided for by this section
shall be conducted before the court sitting with the jury that found the
defendant guilty.

Article 310 CPL | Jury Trial | Deliberation Verdict of Jury
S 310.80 Recording and checking of verdict and polling of jury.
After a verdict has been rendered, it must be recorded on the minutes
and read to the jury, and the jurors must be collectively asked whether
such is their verdict. Even though no juror makes any declaration in the
negative, the jury must, if either party makes such an application, be
polled and each juror separately asked whether the verdict announced by
the foreman is in all respects his verdict. If upon either the
collective or the separate inquiry any juror answers in the negative,
the court must refuse to accept the verdict and must direct the jury to
resume its deliberation. If no disagreement is expressed, the jury must
be discharged from the case, except as otherwise provided in section
400.27

Article 400 | Criminal Procedure | Pre-Sentence Proceedings
S 400.27 Procedure for determining sentence upon conviction for the
offense of murder in the first degree.
1. Upon the conviction of a defendant for the offense of murder in the
first degree as defined by section 125.27 of the penal law, the court
shall promptly conduct a separate sentencing proceeding to determine
whether the defendant shall be sentenced to death or to life
imprisonment without parole pursuant to subdivision five of section
70.00 of the penal law. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to
preclude the people at any time from determining that the death penalty
shall not be sought in a particular case, in which case the separate
sentencing proceeding shall not be conducted and the court may sentence
such defendant to life imprisonment without parole or to a sentence of
imprisonment for the class A-I felony of murder in the first degree
other than a sentence of life imprisonment without parole.
2. The separate sentencing proceeding provided for by this section
shall be conducted before the court sitting with the jury that found the
defendant guilty. The court may discharge the jury and impanel another
jury only in extraordinary circumstances and upon a showing of good
cause, which may include, but is not limited to, a finding of prejudice
to either party. If a new jury is impaneled, it shall be formed in
accordance with the procedures in article two hundred seventy of this
chapter. Before proceeding with the jury that found the defendant
guilty, the court shall determine whether any juror has a state of mind
that is likely to preclude the juror from rendering an impartial
decision based upon the evidence adduced during the proceeding. In
making such determination the court shall personally examine each juror
individually outside the presence of the other jurors. The scope of the
examination shall be within the discretion of the court and may include
questions supplied by the parties as the court deems proper. The
proceedings provided for in this subdivision shall be conducted on the
record; provided, however, that upon motion of either party, and for
good cause shown, the court may direct that all or a portion of the
record of such proceedings be sealed. In the event the court determines
that a juror has such a state of mind, the court shall discharge the
juror and replace the juror with the alternate juror whose name was
first drawn and called. If no alternate juror is available, the court
must discharge the jury and impanel another jury in accordance with
article two hundred seventy of this chapter.
 
SeesSeas said:
I don't recall that the jury was polled after the verdict was announced. Were the jurors polled?
Unless there is an exception, it appears that the jury will be present in court during sentencing on Tuesday.
2. The separate sentencing proceeding provided for by this section
shall be conducted before the court sitting with the jury that found the
defendant guilty.

Article 310 CPL | Jury Trial | Deliberation Verdict of Jury
S 310.80 Recording and checking of verdict and polling of jury.
After a verdict has been rendered, it must be recorded on the minutes
and read to the jury, and the jurors must be collectively asked whether
such is their verdict. Even though no juror makes any declaration in the
negative, the jury must, if either party makes such an application, be
polled and each juror separately asked whether the verdict announced by
the foreman is in all respects his verdict. If upon either the
collective or the separate inquiry any juror answers in the negative,
the court must refuse to accept the verdict and must direct the jury to
resume its deliberation. If no disagreement is expressed, the jury must
be discharged from the case, except as otherwise provided in section
400.27

Article 400 | Criminal Procedure | Pre-Sentence Proceedings
S 400.27 Procedure for determining sentence upon conviction for the
offense of murder in the first degree.
1. Upon the conviction of a defendant for the offense of murder in the
first degree as defined by section 125.27 of the penal law, the court
shall promptly conduct a separate sentencing proceeding to determine
whether the defendant shall be sentenced to death or to life
imprisonment without parole pursuant to subdivision five of section
70.00 of the penal law. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to
preclude the people at any time from determining that the death penalty
shall not be sought in a particular case, in which case the separate
sentencing proceeding shall not be conducted and the court may sentence
such defendant to life imprisonment without parole or to a sentence of
imprisonment for the class A-I felony of murder in the first degree
other than a sentence of life imprisonment without parole.
2. The separate sentencing proceeding provided for by this section
shall be conducted before the court sitting with the jury that found the
defendant guilty. The court may discharge the jury and impanel another
jury only in extraordinary circumstances and upon a showing of good
cause, which may include, but is not limited to, a finding of prejudice
to either party. If a new jury is impaneled, it shall be formed in
accordance with the procedures in article two hundred seventy of this
chapter. Before proceeding with the jury that found the defendant
guilty, the court shall determine whether any juror has a state of mind
that is likely to preclude the juror from rendering an impartial
decision based upon the evidence adduced during the proceeding. In
making such determination the court shall personally examine each juror
individually outside the presence of the other jurors. The scope of the
examination shall be within the discretion of the court and may include
questions supplied by the parties as the court deems proper. The
proceedings provided for in this subdivision shall be conducted on the
record; provided, however, that upon motion of either party, and for
good cause shown, the court may direct that all or a portion of the
record of such proceedings be sealed. In the event the court determines
that a juror has such a state of mind, the court shall discharge the
juror and replace the juror with the alternate juror whose name was
first drawn and called. If no alternate juror is available, the court
must discharge the jury and impanel another jury in accordance with
article two hundred seventy of this chapter.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if the jury was polled or not in this case.
If they weren't, they were asked collectively if they all agreed with the verdict.

The exception would be that this is not a death penalty case.
If it was, after hearing aggravating/mitigating factors, the jury would decide on either life or death.
In this case, the judge will decide, not the jury.

S 400.27 Procedure for determining sentence upon conviction for the offense of murder in the first degree.
1. Upon the conviction of a defendant for the offense of murder in the
first degree as defined by section 125.27 of the penal law, the court
shall promptly conduct a separate sentencing proceeding to determine
whether the defendant shall be sentenced to death or to life
imprisonment without parole pursuant to subdivision five of section
70.00 of the penal law.

Covering Criminal Trials – Journalist’s Guide
If a defendant is found guilty of a crime punishable by death, the same jury that convicted him or her will determine the sentence. During a second phase of the trial, known as the penalty phase, both sides can present witnesses and evidence. ... Thejury has only two choices: execution or life in prison.
 
Sentencing set for Chanel Lewis in Karina Vetrano murder trial
April 23, 2019
KEW GARDENS, Queens (WABC) -- Chanel Lewis, whose sentencing for the murder of jogger Karina Vetrano was postponed last week because of allegations of juror misconduct, will learn his fate today.

A sentencing hearing is set to begin at 9:30 a.m. in Queens. The Vetrano family is expected to testify.
[...]
The judge has the option to sentence Lewis from 25 years to life behind bars.
 
They have the wrong man. I guess it easy to to just blame him. In 30 years we will hear about the real killer smh
 
God bless her family. Hope they find the real killer
 
Last edited:
Lewis' support team claims the judge will be fired..
Lewis was convicted by a 12 member jury, not the judge.
All the judge did was follow the law. Why would he be fired?
Will those 12 members of the jury be fired from their jobs too?
 
Man gets life in prison for murdering Queens jogger Karina Vetrano | Daily Mail Online
UPDATED: 12:38 EDT, 23 April 2019
[...]
In an emotional victim impact statement read by Vetrano's mother Cathie prior to sentencing, the grieving mother slammed Lewis as being 'remorseless' and a 'pathetic evil coward'.

'So repulsive are you, that you left her hidden to be further desecrated in the summer heat by bugs and animals… like a snake you slithered away into the night,' Cathie told Lewis.

'My hope is that you live a long life within the prison of the law and the prison of your conscious.'

Cathie declared the sentencing day as 'Karina's day' and, at one point, held up a pair of white shoes that her daughter had worn to work the day of her murder.

'This is a day where we acknowledge that Karina’s life matters,' she said, adding that her daughter was a 'valiant warrior and a queen'.

Addressing Lewis, the emotional mother said: 'The second you put your hands on a child of God, you rejected the Holy Spirit and acted out as the devil.

'The angels wept and the devils danced in delight as you began to torture and impose the most brutal death on my daughter.'
[...]
 
SeesSeas said:
Chanel Lewis sentenced to life behind bars for Vetrano murder
April 23, 2019
[...]
Lewis spoke briefly on his own behalf for the first time ahead of Aloise’s sentence.
”I’m sorry for the family, but I didn’t do this,” Lewis said.
Click to expand...
And let's not forget that long detailed videotaped confession that Lewis made contradicting his brief, one sentence statement that he made today.
Regardless if it should have been admissible, (and the court found it was) it's clear as day that he confessed to doing it. Details so minor that only someone that was there would have known.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 137 more.
Total: 2,799 (members: 138, guests: 2,661)

Online statistics

Members online
138
Guests online
2,661
Total visitors
2,799
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,684
Messages
18,145,193
Members
231,488
Latest member
upstairsmeow
Back
Top