SA peremptory challenge denied

[Whome?]

IF Casey gets a mistrial........................ People EVERYWHERE will be having a WTF moment.

Oh trust me it will be more than a WTF moment :maddening:

 

[SoCalSleuth]

I teach a course: Racial Bias in Jury Selection. JP has to make a finding that the State's reasons for challenging the juror are disingenous and that the more likely reason is race. JP apparently found so based on his reasoning that other jurors answered similarly and weren't challenged. I didn't find this to be true. But, after all, it's his call.

 

[grandmaj]

Judge Perry has been very careful with the race issue. When Baez and Mason complained right in the beginning, he made sure it was on the record that jurors are chosen from their driver's license at random.

Now I predict they are going to get to the 11th hour and the DT are going to file a motion to throw the entire panel.

Judge Perry knows what the evidence is in this case. He knows the State has a strong case. He is doing everything in his power to eliminate a mistrial. He was in a corner and he had to balance the entirety of the case. The State has the ability to take the life, freedom and liberty of Casey. They have recommended the death penalty.

I think his ruling while I don't agree with it on many levels, was the only one he could make with a race challenge against the State.

This lady may surprise everyone. She may be the meat and taters that sees right through the garbage. She has lived a long life, don't mess with the grannys of the world.

 

[nursebeeme]

this was the way I took the situation:

1)SA tried to use preemptory exclusion based on the judgement statement

2)DT stood up and said we object she is one of the few minorities

3)HHJP said they could not use it as preemptory exclusion because it didn't follow the rules/law of PE as she explained her statement and also said she could follow the law

4)there was no strike used here.. he objected to the PE due to cause

moo

((I personally see it as no biggie.. they will strike her on the backside))

 

[JSR]

I am not sure the juror can be selected as an alternate but maybe? I've heard two different things.

1) The jury panel is picked and the alternates are randomly chosen. (this would allow for the possibility)

2) The alternates are the ones selected after the first 12 are seated (if this is right, the juror is not going to be an alternate)

Anyone know which scenario we are looking at? Either of these or another one?

It's my understanding, that the alternates are randomly selected and that no one on the jury is aware if they are an alternate or if they are the actual seated juror. My hope and prayer is that this lady is an alternate.

 

[gamom]

Ok, listening right now. If she has no friends why does she have a FB account? Just curious?

 

[Future Juror]

Part 13 is actually from this morning's session, it starts off with juror #1312.

I just corrected that. It's here, Part 13

http://www.wftv.com/video/27889247/index.html

 

[whiteangora]

Ok, listening right now. If she has no friends why does she have a FB account? Just curious?

She said she plays the games that Facebook offers, that seemed to be the only reason for her account.

 

[nursebeeme]

An alternate juror is a person selected in the same manner all other jurors are selected. The alternate juror also sits in a court and listens to the proceedings of a case. The evidences and hearing of the case is heard by the alternate juror also. However, an alternate juror is not made a part of the jury that render verdict unless one of the other jurors become sick, injured, legally compromised, incapacitated, or has a family emergency.

An alternate juror can function as a jury member until the jury receives the case and goes for deliberation. In such circumstances, an alternate juror will be dismissed from court with thanks.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/alternate-juror/

 

[gitana1]

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"

SomeRandomeName is uploading the entire channel on his or her youtube channel.

A juror cannot just walk off the jury once they are seated.

Also, it was a very smart move on the part of the defense and a bad move on the part of the state.

It happened so fast and made me just sick when I realized what happened. I have been very confident about this case since day one. Now I feel that after three years, we may face more delay.

This will not be positive for the state, IMO. This lady seemed very sweet but also indecisive and with limited intelligence and life experience. She seems to have a very small world. In my experience, people like that tend to discard what they do not understand and go with gut based on how people look or treat them. Thus, this lady will be unlikely to understand forensics and complicated timelines or psychological motives.

She will not understand the grim and professional state as well as she will the folksy, flirty defense. She will veer more towards what makes sense to her: "Aww, I saw those pictures that nice Mr. Baez showed of casey and the baby. She loved that baby, I can tell. How could she have hurt her? And she looks so sweet and young. And she smiled at me! No, she couldn't hurt anyone. Everyone gets mad now and then but I can tell she's nice. And Mr. Mason? I really understand him. He likes me and he would not represent a bad person. He's good folk. And Mr. Baez, well he treated me so nice? I don't think he would lie to me! Then there's the momma. She said it was pizza. Well that sure could stink, that's true. And she doesn't think her daughter did it either. No, I just can't vote guilty."

She is a nightmare juror for this case. Yes, there is a possibility that she could be swayed by the other jurors but I feel the risk of her causing a hung jury is huge and that's a risk that we can't afford.

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.

Not true. A peremptory challenge is without cause. One does not need to show why they are asking for the strike. But under the law, if the other side can show that the underlying reason is based on sex, or race, or religion, then the peremptory can be dismissed. That's what happened here. JB objected and so JA was forced to give his reasoning. The judge did not find his reasoning persuasive because other jurors had expressed similar sentiments and so he ruled that the peremptory was based inappropriately on race.

I have not heard the tape yet, but from the posts it sounds like she said she could not judge and then when asked if she could once she heard the facts (or something like that) she said she COULD. I think the arguement here, is in the end she gave the right answer. With out hearing the tape, I agree with HHJP. What makes her any different then the one juror the DT tried to have removed that said he thought she was "proboly guilty" and could not consider mitigating factors? Once they told him the law, he changed his answers. Sounds like the judge is being fair to both sides. :twocents:

But once I listen to the juror I will eat crow if I change my answer...

You are right. JA should have tried to dismiss for cause first and should have questioned her more. He blew it.

I think it was way back in the first hardship phase. It was the first thing she said. However, she may have gone home...prayed on it (or whatever) and come to realize that if she had facts, she COULD judge.

She said it again at the beginning today, IIRC. Then she changed her mind a bit. Sounded like she wanted to please.

But the State wanted to strike her, they get 10. The DT objected, saying that Ashton's objection was racially motivated. Ashton gave his reason, which had nothing to do with race at all - so he should have got to use his stike, imo. HHJP sided with the DT.

What am I supposed to think of that?

Not being a legal mind, or even fit for a jury, most likely, it seems that HHJP was calling Ashton a racist without actually saying those words.

Not really. A person can profile without being racist but it's not a valid reason for a peremptory. And that's why HHJP sustained the objection. However, I don't think this lady's race had anything to do with the strike. It was her inability to comprehend and her stated reluctance to judge. JA just didn't question her enough so he could show more of a reason so the judge had to sustain JB's objection. If JA could have given better reasons, or waited to strike her after more diverse jurors had been seated or moved to the next phase, he may have had better luck.

 

[Amster]

So, if the SA wants to challenge an AA PJ for any reason.....that is considered racist? How pathetic.

JA did nothing wrong. HHJP did.

 

[nursebeeme]

gitana1 the way I understand the alternate method that hhjp is using to seat the jury they will be allowed to backstrike after the 12 are seated and replace them one by one.

inal but that is how I understood this alternate method he is using

 

[technicalconfusion]

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

It's also possible that this lady has had an abusive past - one reason why she has no friends, and sticks to herself, kwim?

I find it difficult to decide who should be/shouldn't be a juror without actually seeing them. This gal may be intelligent, but being that she's a loner, being up in front of a judge could have well tongue tied her.

 

[nursebeeme]

So, if the SA wants to challenge an AA PJ for any reason.....that is considered racist? How pathetic.

JA did nothing wrong. HHJP did.

it had nothing to do with race imhoo... what we do have to thank for race even coming into the confusion is the defense team saying it
:twocents:

 

[JSR]

Ok, listening right now. If she has no friends why does she have a FB account? Just curious?

She indicated she didn't consider anyone her "friend" just acquaintances. She doesn't consider anyone her friend. Which is another line of questioning I found troublesome.

 

[Amster]

it had nothing to do with race imhoo... what we do have to thank for race even coming into the confusion is the defense team saying it
:twocents:

Exactly....just because CM said it. So, what's the point of the state ever attempting to challenge an AA PJ? CM will squeal racism and HHJP will scream at JA.

I'm pretty disgusted right now. Better take a break. :banghead:

 

[tehcloser]

Can they try to strike her again? I don't think they can?

 

[Future Juror]

After listening to her answers again, I feel HHJP was (I erased it, lol). I don't even think she understood what DNA is, when JB starts questioning her. The whole thing is just bizarre :banghead:

http://www.wftv.com/video/27889247/index.html

 

[nursebeeme]

Exactly....just because CM said it. So, what's the point of the state ever attempting to challenge an AA PJ? CM will squeal racism and HHJP will scream at JA.

I'm pretty disgusted right now. Better take a break. :banghead:

me too LOL... I am off to watch the nancy grace entertainment show LOL

do you think you could watch this process all over again if they fail to seat one here?

I don't think I could.. as I work nights and I have to sleep sometime! LOL

 

[nursebeeme]

Can they try to strike her again? I don't think they can?

they didn't try to strike her

they tried to use preemptive...whatever the heck it is... cause (without even interviewing her enough)

moo