Posted on 08/28/2016 11:59:18 AM PDT by Theoria
The criminal trial ended more than two and a half years ago, but Judge Jesse M. Furman can still vividly recall the case. It stands out, not because of the defendant or the subject matter, but because of its rarity: In his four-plus years on the bench in Federal District Court in Manhattan, it was his only criminal jury trial.
He is far from alone.
Judge J. Paul Oetken, in half a decade on that bench, has had four criminal trials, including one that was repeated after a jury deadlocked. For Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who has handled some of the nation’s most important terrorism cases, it has been 18 months since his last criminal jury trial.
“It’s a loss,” Judge Kaplan said, “because when one thinks of the American system of justice, one thinks of justice being administered by juries of our peers. And to the extent that there’s a decline in criminal jury trials, that is happening less frequently.”
The national decline in trials, both criminal and civil, has been noted in law journal articles, bar association studies and judicial opinions. But recently, in the two federal courthouses in Manhattan and a third in White Plains (known collectively as the Southern District of New York), the vanishing of criminal jury trials has never seemed so pronounced.
The Southern District held only 50 criminal jury trials last year, the lowest since 2004, according to data provided by the court. The pace remains slow this year.
In 2005, records show, there were more than double the number of trials: 106. And decades ago, legal experts said, the numbers were much higher.
“It’s hugely disappointing,” said Judge Jed S. Rakoff, a 20-year veteran of the Manhattan federal bench. “A trial is the one place where the system really gets tested.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
My brother was an ADA. He says almost everyone pleads out.
That’s because the cost of jury trial is astronomically expensive for the defendant. Even if you win, you lose. Prosecutors know this and coerce defendants into pleading guilty to lesser charges even if they’re innocent.
Because of budgetary restraints on both the State and the Defendant, the system functions only because of plea “deals.” That is why it is crucial to have ethical Constitutionalist and dare I say it? Christian, prosecutors.
In my experience, 95% of the arrestees are definitely guilty of one or more crimes. Good prosecutors understand what a jury would likely render in judgment, and offers something less than that to the Defendant. No one, State or Defendant, wants to play “Jury Roulette” unless there is absolutely no other option. Surprisingly, a lot of fair and good justice comes out of this somewhat flawed system. We read about the exceptions, some of which are real lulus.
Oldplayer
The power to prosecute is the power to destroy. That’s why unethical prosecutors are so abhorrent to rational people. Nifong in the Duke lacrosse case comes to mind, but I’m sure there are plenty of others. The Austin folks who prosecuted Tom DeLay are another, and they never paid a price for their purely malicious actions, I don’t believe.
Seems like I get called for jury duty more than ever in Harris County, TX
Not federal, but state district courts.
I’m sure if there is strong evidence, the “smoking gun” so to speak, that those defendants would go for a plea bargain.
If there’s weak evidence, or he said/she said sorts of stories to be told, I bet those defendants would go for a trial, hoping to be found not guilty.
Then you have rare cases such as OJ, where he was able to afford the best attorneys, and he felt he had nothing to lose by going to court. Even if OJ had done a plea bargain ,he would have faced a long prison sentence for manslaughter, or other lesser charge besides murder.
I’ve been called for jury duty three times in the last two years. All three took the plea agreement. The nice part is they give you a phone number to call to check if this is the case before you have to be there. Saves a lot of running around for nothing.
Same in Bexar.
Reminds me of the Salem Witch Trials.
Those arrested and plead “Guilty” were fined, had their property confiscated and jailed.
Those who plead “Not Guilty” had their property confiscated, were found guilty and hanged.
One man refused to plea, was tortured with weights, and would only say “More Weight!” He died not giving a plea, so the local Sheriff could not confiscate his property and it went to his heirs.
I recall being on jury duty, and being told by the people there, that about 90% of legal cases are settled before going to trial. There is either an out of court settlement, in the case of some civil litigation, or a plea bargain to a lesser charge, in the case of a criminal case.
My God, if every case went to jury!!!??
You’d see your day in court 15 years from now :)
I once get a bunch tickets for 400 dollars because i was on vacation, my plates were stolen, and the car was parked illegally for days.
OF COURSE the cops didn’t check the plate against the sticker, lazy ####s.
But the judge didn’t want to hear any of it.
THAT’S A little scary, how you can be railroaded.
The stupid OJ jury thoroughly discredited jury trials. Plus the fact that (conservative) white guys are routinely knocked out of jury pools by racist lawyers.
What about cases such as the Freddie Gray trials?
There were bench trials by the judge, as opposed to trial by jury, in some of those cases.
I think a defendant can ask for a bench trial, as opposed to a jury? Someone correct me if I’m wrong.
Heck, I think I would go for the bench trial, if charged with some racially tinged crime in Baltimore City. Just saying, being tried by what will be a majority black jury in Baltimore City, would be enough to make you think of alternatives to such people judging your fate.
Actually, the vast majority of criminal cases are pleas.
My brother says obama’s sons know the public defenders usually are too busy and or suck.
And the vast majority of the time, they know they are guilty so why take the chance for a big term.
I’m sure a few who are not guilty take pleas, and that sucks, but no system can ever be perfect.
Or maybe it’s because, in most criminal trials, the accused is actually guilty.
Saw this article today and pondered what would happen if the case were tried by a jury. In a nutshell: Police on private property, repeatedly asked to leave or produce a warrant. Cop points taser at dogs, homeowner kills the officer....
http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/03/cop-pointing-stun-at-mans-dogs/
Judge = .gov police= .gov prosecutor = .gov defense attorney = .gov or private.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.