SA peremptory challenge denied

[tragco]

I think this is serious enough to warrant its own thread. I never saw the juror, did not know her race at first. She was sweet but had a hard time understanding very basic questions, stated she had no friends, and is opposed to the death penalty or even to judging others. What do you all think?

This juror is now seated. The State has exercised their peremptory challenge and it was denied due to the factor of race.

 

[darcedarce]

I think race had nothing to do with it. It was clear IMO that the woman was having trouble understanding very basic questions and she stated initially that she did not feel comfortable judging others based on what other people said.

 

[JSR]

My opinion is that this woman should NOT have been selected to sit on this jury, and none of my reasons include race. She had so much trouble answering the most basic of questions. She isn't going to keep up with the trial. And she's going to vote not guilty simply because she isn't comfortable judging others. And at first she indicated she didn't agree with the DP. There were many reasons why she shouldn't have made it this round. I have for the most part agreed with HHJP but I think he made and error. I understand why he did, because CM played the race card and won.

If this is a hung jury this woman will be the reason for it. But have no fear, I know the state will retry the case. Casey WILL be convicted one day. Now I'm no longer as confident as I was before this process came along that this will be trial that convicts her. I assumed that people like this woman would be rightfully dismissed for proper challenges.

 

[Amster]

I'll wait for the replay....

 

[Adrienne37]

I'll wait for the replay....

I'm with you on this Amster. I'm about to go and rewatch the raw video to make sure what I recall is correct.

 

[tragco]

I think there is a real good possibility of a hung jury now.

I don't know if the fault is HHJP's though. The SA should have questioned her more. They should have tried to challenge for cause first. They should have waited until later before trying to do a peremptory strike. I admire Ashton greatly and am sure he never thought in his wildest nightmares that this would happen, but he really dropped the ball on this one. IMO.

 

[cook78]

I'm really confused and I'll apologize if I sound like I don't know what I'm talking about (because I don't) but why can't the SA just use a Strike? I thought they could each strike 10 people out? Is the Strike the same thing as the Peremptory Challenge and they need permission for it?

 

[tragco]

I'm really confused and I'll apologize if I sound like I don't know what I'm talking about (because I don't) but why can't the SA just use a Strike? I thought they could each strike 10 people out? Is the Strike the same thing as the Peremptory Challenge and they need permission for it?

The Peremptory challenge was the strike. The SA did use their strike which in almost every case is an automatic dismissal for the potential juror. There is a caveat though that it cannot be racially motivated. Cheney Mason objected that the strike was based on race. HHJP sustained this objection, and the state cannot now strike this juror.

 

[akashana]

So we don't know the race, right? My personal opinion is Hispanic people on the jury may be more likely to convict because KC tried to pin Caylee's disappearance on an imaginary Hispanic woman, and that Black jurors may be more inclined to acquit because they understand how easily someone can get railroaded in court from their own or others' experiences. But I also think that any single, Black female jurors who have either struggled to rear kids on their own or have seen others' struggles will resent KC's rather cushy life and supportive parents, and that may factor in as well.

 

[uklaw]

Question: Did the State seek to Challenge for cause first?

Without seeing the raw video (been trying to keep away), I am unsure if this is a coup for the Defense since if this woman has problems understanding the case she may just accept what other jurors say.

 

[tragco]

Question: Did the State seek to Challenge for cause first?

Without seeing the raw video (been trying to keep away), I am unsure if this is a coup for the Defense since if this woman has problems understanding the case she may just accept what other jurors say.

No, Uklaw, they did not, which is one reason the objection by the defense was sustained.

 

[uklaw]

I'm really confused and I'll apologize if I sound like I don't know what I'm talking about (because I don't) but why can't the SA just use a Strike? I thought they could each strike 10 people out? Is the Strike the same thing as the Peremptory Challenge and they need permission for it?

Yes and no.

Broadly speaking, the State cannot use a pre-emptory strike to remove a juror where the motive for striking the juror is that the juror belongs to a congnisable group (i.e. because the Juror is black or female or such like).

Key case : Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986)

 

[Adrienne37]

Here is the article on WFTV regarding this. Also, the video portion of this juror should be on video #13 on WFTV; however, that particular video is bringing up another juror.

The state did try to eliminate an African-American woman who said she couldn't judge people, but Judge Perry didn't allow it.

http://www.wftv.com/news/27880756/detail.html

 

[gamom]

Link? Anyone? Without hearing for myself, I would say this could actually be a positive for the SA. If for instance she does not understand the testimony and evidence she will most likely turn to other jurors for help and take their understanding of testimony as fact. It is just hard to say...

Lets not forget, if she truly has a hard time with judgement, she may be the first to walk out of the trial allowing an alternate to fill her place. Just sayin...

Does anyone have a link? Sounds like a smart move by the DT to get JA to be impulsive with his strike. Again, getting what CM has promised us all along, a "circus trial"

 

[uklaw]

On this issue of race and this jury pool does anyone know if Perry followed through with his idea of going to the homeless centre for Jury Selection?

 

[Turnadot]

I still don't get it.

The lady admitted she couldn't judge people; it's not about race, but logic. If she can't judge, she shouldn't be on a jury panel that will have to judge the evidence presented, which results in judging the defendant.

Ashton's objection made sense to me, and I feel that HHJP dismissed it simply because the lady was AA.

 

[Turnadot]

From my POV, the lady could have been lily white and I'd still think she has no business on a jury. It really is a question of common sense, to me. but I'm not a judge or a lawyer...

 

[katydid23]

I think this woman may end up voting Guilty. I think when she starts seeing the simple evidence, Casey not reporting the child missing, Casey dancing At Fusion during that time,
stealing from family and friends, lying to the people trying to find her child, the smell in the trunk, the 911 calls, she will decide that she is guilty. imoo

 

[Adrienne37]

Judge Perry did not dismiss the state's peremptory challenge because she was African-American. He dismissed it because she could not judge another person (which she readily admitted) and he stated that others that they had questioned had similar beliefs and they were allowed through so he saw no reason to allow the state to use their peremptory challenge. There is still a third round of questioning to go through and perhaps she will not meet the expectations at that time and will be dismissed.

 

[Turnadot]

Judge Perry did not dismiss the state's peremptory challenge because she was African-American. He dismissed it because she could not judge another person (which she readily admitted) and he stated that others that they had questioned had similar beliefs and they were allowed through so he saw no reason to allow the state to use their peremptory challenge. There is still a third round of questioning to go through and perhaps she will not meet the expectations at that time and will be dismissed.

I must have missed the other potential jurors who flatly stated they can't judge another person.