Posted on 06/12/2005 4:07:12 AM PDT by GailA
Jurors likely won't all be from Memphis, and race, party affiliation, religion all play into the mix
By Lawrence Buser June 12, 2005
While many critics and supporters alike believe a home-court jury will ultimately help John Ford, Kathryn Bowers and Roscoe Dixon waltz away from corruption charges, the chances of all-Memphis juries deciding their cases are slim at best.
In federal court here, juries are drawn from pools of registered voters not only from Shelby, but also from four other counties in the Western Division of the federal court's Western District. Those are Dyer, Fayette, Lauderdale and Tipton.
But supporters of the longtime Memphis politicians still could end up on their juries to decide whether they took illegal payments to promote legislation for a phony FBI company called E-Cycle.
"You can't inquire (in jury selection) as to how they vote because that would be an unconstitutional inquiry," said former federal prosecutor Dan Clancy. "You can't eliminate someone because they vote Democrat or Republican or because of their race or sex or religion.
"If somebody worked for their campaign? You could raise it, but it wouldn't necessarily get someone off. The only question the court can really ask about that is 'Can you be fair?'
"I've had a policeman on a jury where I was trying another policeman. Well, that's a pretty tight brotherhood, but the court said, 'Too bad. He said he can be fair and that's that.' "
In 1990, a perfect storm of a jury resulted in a mistrial in the bank fraud trial of Ford's brother, former U.S. Rep. Harold Ford, and three co-defendants.
The two-month trial included a jury of eight black people and four white people. Among them were two jurors with criminal records they failed to disclose, an alleged drug user, a juror who slept under the table during deliberations, a Ford campaigner and others who said they were unwilling to convict the congressman.
Over Ford's protests, jurors in the second trial were chosen in Jackson, Tenn., from the 17 counties of the district's Eastern Division after U.S. Dist. Court Judge Odell Horton noted the first jury's misconduct and the "avalanche" of publicity surrounding the case.
The trial was held in Memphis where jurors were sequestered four days a week -- a rare procedure in federal court -- and spectators were not allowed to enter the courtroom once testimony began.
Ford argued that selecting a jury from the Eastern Division significantly reduced the number of black people in the jury pool and deprived him of his right to be tried by a jury of his peers. But six weeks later, Ford was shouting his thanks to the 11 white jurors and one black juror that acquitted him and two others.
The late U.S. Dist. Court Judge Jerry Turner, who presided over the second trial, told the crowded courtroom the verdict showed that "black people and white people can judge each other fairly, if they are just given a chance."
There has been no indication by prosecutors that they intend to seek such special procedures in the cases against John Ford, Bowers and Dixon.
"I'm quite sure that West Tennesseans (of the Western Division) are perfectly capable of being fair and impartial," said defense attorney William Massey, who represents Bowers. "It doesn't matter if someone's heard about the case. The question is can you set that aside and be fair."
Whether sequestering jurors will be required in these highly publicized cases will be a matter for the judges who preside over them. While state criminal courts routinely sequester jurors for first-degree murder trials, the trend for federal courts here and across the country is to take less drastic safeguards to promote a fair trial.
"Sequestering could be just for deliberations or there could just be instructions or admonishments from the bench saying 'Don't read the paper about this' or 'No doing your own research,' " said Anne Skove, a senior analyst with the National Center for State Courts in Williamsburg, Va. "Think about the Michael Jackson jurors. They go home at the end of the day, right? That's about as high profile as it gets."
Fair?? With a politician? Why?
I hope, I hope, I hope that I just might get called to do my civic duty!!!!!!!!!!! I would be very fair!!!!!!
Theres no way to field a fair and impartial jury in Memphis. The Ford family owns Memphis and any jurists from the Bluff City would vote to convict Ford even if the evidence was irrefutible.
I just sat on a jury this week that delt with Assult and Battey on a police officer with a deadly weapon among other charges and the Public Defender use up all his causes excuse getting rid of people who either was or was related to anyone who was a Cop or a Prison Guard (Which they were a crap load of in this jury pool.) So I would assume the proscute would be allow to ask and remove anyone who work on a past Ford campign.
The real question is will local blacks vote to convict Ford?
that is what we are talking about here....unless someone is suggesting a few of his white cronies are going to be on the jury.
The Feds will ultimately have wasted a lot of time, effort, and money trying John Ford in Memphis. He'll walk. The big question for Ford is, will he get an early enough trial date so that he will be able to run, once acquitted, for the seat he just vacated come fall?
I do not understand the logic of the prosecutor in not filing these charges in another jurisdiction.
So would I.
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.