2011.05.13 - Sidebar Thread (Jury Selection Day Five)

[SurfieTX]

It also would be interesting to know case law about sleuthing prospective jurors in real-time in the courtroom. I read that they can do background checks on jurors, but I think that's only after they have been seated.

 

[Marina2]

I'm glad he's out for another reason though. In one of his answers he gave the name of the band he belonged to and a recording he made (thanks to JB). Everyone would have known who at least one of the jurors were if he had been picked.

ETA: JB should have made a motion to have him excused right then.

 

[Turnadot]

Welcome, Galerie!

When Jean C shares our opinion, she's almost always considered a more than respectable and knowledgeable source by posters.

Not by me! Talking heads do not impress me.

I consider the real experts to be in the Ask A Lawyer thread, because their opinions aren't motivated by $$$ and ratings. That, and Mr. Hornsby's blog; he's nailed every issue in this case.

 

[cluciano63]

Jean and Sunny were concerned that not enough potentials jurors will be offered/seen/questioned, not understanding the precedent the judge is using by trying to limit them to the first two or so groups to choose from. They were not talking about the fact JB has to use a strike. But they believe both sides should be able to see allof the holdovers before they have to use all of their strikes. That is the issue. I am just typing what was discussed. I am not an HLN fan all, but they are making sense.

 

[wvjules]

Can someone explain why they keep asking about dogs? :waitasec: I'm new to this case and am trying to catch up but haven't figured out the dog thing yet.

 

[nursebeeme]

I remember HHJP discussing last night that he was going to be looking up case law on something pertaining to jury selection.

Does anyone else actually think that he would not be fully apprised of applicable case law BEFORE making this monumental decision??

His go to phrase is ..."If I am wrong then someone will tell me I am wrong."

I have faith in his decisions.

amen!

now what was the name of this method he is using? If IS wanted to be really smart they would look up the method and discuss it instead of playing the "if it bleeds it leads" card

 

[Oakley]

The PJ didn't go to jail. IIRC

No he did not. He performed community service.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

I googled: apparently there are two main methods used as far as when strikes take place, and other methods possible. The Judge has wide latitude in deciding which to use, but there have been sustained appeals for some methods.

For instance, one way not used in this case I saw described was to have both the defense and prosecution "secretly" write down their choice, strike or not strike. Then it's reviewed and if a strike is used by both, they both lose a strike.

There's no single set way, but I am sure HHJP is very aware of the ones that can cause an appeal issue.

I was surprised that the last juror was not stricken for cause and the defense had to use up a strike, but I'm happy about it

I am most sure HHJP knows what he is doing. As far as an appeal, you can bet your bippie it will happen no matter what he does in this case. However, appeals are very long processes, and rarely are trial court judges overturned. Expecially one as esteemed and knowledgeable as HHJP.

IMHO of course.

 

[Wise Old Owl]

It also would be interesting to know case law about sleuthing prospective jurors in real-time in the courtroom. I read that they can do background checks on jurors, but I think that's only after they have been seated.

I have first hand knowledge of this practice. About 6 - 8 months ago I did jury duty here. I was on a panel. We all were escorted into the courtroom. The attorney (both sides) asked general questions and polled us one at a time for answers and then asked specific pj's specific questions.

We broke for lunch. When we were leaving the courtroom - 3 of us were asked to stay. I was concerned. I was one of them. While we waited - one of the guys spoke up and said I have a warrant!!! Now who in their right mind would report for jury duty knowing they have an open arrest warrant? Anyway, I was called in. One of the para's at the table asked me my DOB (don't know why or if they wanted to confirm) I told them and they immediately let me go. I have a very common name and it seems there was another (same name) woman who did have open warrants!!!!

It scared me to death - but yes - the entire time we were in the courtoom those two women were on latops clicking away - checking each one of us out.

 

[Lanie]

This is my 2 cents, non-legal, common sense opinion on this jury selection.

A defendent going on trial is entitled to 12 (or 8 or 10, depending) impartial jurors. They are not entitled to a specific number to choose from. I do not see any way in he77 the way HHJP is doing this is going to result in a mistrial or an appeal.

This guy is just now talking about 'handicapping' either side. Both sides are being treated the same, HHJP is not telling DT, "Here's 30 people to pick from" and telling the state, "Here's 100 people to pick from." I don't think there is a leg to stand on here.

 

[strawberry]

I thought they canceled that yesterday.

I asked that question earlier and don't know if it got answered. Did the DT give up on the hair research then?

 

[LandAuxvasse]

MOO!!

I wonder if the judge is discussing this case:
Lottimer v. North Broward Hospital District, 889 So. 2d 165 (Fla 4th DCA 2004)

I found this information here:
http://www.juryblog.com/the-trial-lawyers-rights/right-to-back-strike/

 

[amysmom]

Can someone explain why they keep asking about dogs? :waitasec: I'm new to this case and am trying to catch up but haven't figured out the dog thing yet.

They will be bringing in evidence by 'cadaver dogs' & they want to see if the juror is going to believe what they hear regarding that.

eta..more info in a post below!

 

[teddiebear1955]

JMO ...JB DID NOT Have to use his strike ...my understanding is ...JB should have shut up and waited. JB could have let this PJ be included and then used his strike later on ... heard more PJ before makin up his mind ...now he has made the Judge mad at him for tryin to force the Judge to do his biddin. No means no to this Judge and he doesnt have to be forced to change his position . BUT NO MATTER WHAT JB DID NOT HAVE TO SAY YES :loser:...that was his mistake !!!!! JMO

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

Can someone explain why they keep asking about dogs? :waitasec: I'm new to this case and am trying to catch up but haven't figured out the dog thing yet.

Cadaver dogs were used to identify decomposition odors in the car (trunk) and the Anthony's home - they want to determine if the Potential Jurors have any specific knowledge/information/experience/interest regarding that type of dog training etc.

 

[Softail]

I really like Judge Perry, but I think this needed to start at least last week. I'm not seeing how they can possibly start on time. :dunno:

 

[lishac23]

I googled: apparently there are two main methods used as far as when strikes take place, and other methods possible. The Judge has wide latitude in deciding which to use, but there have been sustained appeals for some methods.

For instance, one way not used in this case I saw described was to have both the defense and prosecution "secretly" write down their choice, strike or not strike. Then it's reviewed and if a strike is used by both, they both lose a strike.

There's no single set way, but I am sure HHJP is very aware of the ones that can cause an appeal issue.

I was surprised that the last juror was not stricken for cause and the defense had to use up a strike, but I'm happy about it

Just to add on to what you've said... either way the judge decides to "seat the jury" each side gets 10 premptory (sp) strikes where the judge can't object or intervene. From what I understand from catching up...the judge is going to use the method (can remember the name) where he seats the 12 jurors in the "box" with the alternates as well. The lawyers then taking turns striking a juror and there is no reasoning needed. (Just calls the number and the juror is gone). WHen that juror is removed he/she is replaced by another juror from the "pool" (that they're creating now). Once both sides have used up all their "strikes" the remaining jurors/alternates still seated are IN LIKE FLYNN...so to speak.

 

[Brattigirle]

I asked that question earlier and don't know if it got answered. Did the DT give up on the hair research then?

IIRC it turns out that it was still just an experiment so the DT has no grounds. Does that make sense?

 

[Oakley]

Can anyone tell me why he didn't at least wait for the third round to strike him? It seems to me that he had another chance to have him excused before he used his strike.

My guess is he really really really didn't want him on the jury. And judging by Casey's hissy fit just before leaving for lunch, I'd say neither did she for some reason. I think she's PO'ed they had to use a strike though. JMO

 

[yeknomaras]

hahaha I'm on trial for killing my daughter! So funny!