Posted on 03/29/2004 6:55:08 AM PST by freepatriot32
NEW YORK (March 29) - Jurors have described their deliberations in the trial of two former Tyco International executives as ''poisonous'' and ''irreparably compromised.'' The judge has called their notes to him ''disturbing'' and seems to be leaning toward a mistrial.
Nonetheless, Judge Michael J. Obus concurred with jurors' request to return to work Monday morning, even after they wrote Friday that they had ''ceased to be able to conduct respectful, open-minded, good-faith deliberations.''
Obus must decide whether to keep pushing jurors to overcome what they have described as an atmosphere of animosity that has dominated the jury room in recent days.
''The judge is going to do everything possible to refrain from declaring a mistrial,'' said Christopher J. Bebel, a former federal prosecutor who practices securities law in Houston. ''But there's only so far he can go ... in all likelihood it looks like his efforts will be futile.''
The jurors are deliberating 32 counts against Tyco's former chief executive L. Dennis Kozlowski, 57, and former chief financial officer Mark Swartz, 43. The defendants are accused of stealing $600 million from Tyco.
The defense argued that the two men earned every dime and that the board of directors and the company's auditors knew about the compensation and never objected.
According to notes from other jurors, one juror wants Swartz and Kozlowski acquitted on all counts and has refused to deliberate any other potential verdict.
One juror, a 79-year-old former teacher and lawyer, on Friday made what some observers described as an ''OK'' gesture with her thumb and forefinger as she passed the defense and prosecution tables.
Over the weekend, at least two news organizations, the New York Post and The Wall Street Journal, took the unusual step of identifying the juror by name as the purported holdout. The Post ran a Page One story Saturday with a drawing of her and the headline, ''Ms. Trial.'' Legal experts say that could be grounds for a mistrial because publicity could increase pressure on her.
The defendants are accused of stealing from the Bermuda-based conglomerate they once headed by hiding excessive pay packages from the company's board and by selling stock at inflated prices. Much of the trial has been dominated by descriptions of flamboyant behavior and breakneck spending emblematic of the era of corporate scandal that produced a string of recent high-profile white-collar trials.
AP-NY-03-29-04 0930EST
Don't you know it's dangerous to use "woman" and "a BIG but" in the same paragraph?
Although this instance seems suspect, our 1,000 year old common law right of jury nullification is a positive aspect to the US legal system.
http://www.fija.org
A plant? I don't think so. Do you think that maybe the prosecution hasn't proved it's case, and the media coverage (being liberal) hasn't disclosed this in its coverage?
We've heard about all the lavish spending, and it was (agreed) over-the-top, and the media wants a guilty verdict ON THAT BASIS, but the question here was --was it CRIMINAL?
It's only criminal if it was unapproved and fraudulently/intentionally hidden from the board.
I'm not sure that the prosecution has proved this.
And the hold-out is apparently a retired lawyer who just may be zeroing in on the proper legal question.
Also, this quote from the NY Post:
The divisions on the jury prompted defense attorneys to make three separate motions for a mistrial over two days. Judge Obus declined to grant any of them. One of the notes indicated the majority of the jury favored a conviction. "One or more jurors ... refuse to recognize the right of at least one juror to have a good-faith belief that the prosecution had not proved its case," the note said. Word of the animosity had seemed sudden. Earlier Thursday, the jurors had indicated that they were making progress in the complicated case.
So the jurors "out of control" seem to be the ones favoring conviction, and one juror who disagrees is holding her gound, civilly. That's my take.
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.