From reading the article the juror had at least applied to be an FBI agent. The question to me is how far into that process was he.
And this is a lesson for all who want criminals put away, dont play funny with getting on a jury. All you do is set things up for a retrial years later when memories have faded and evidence is old.
fwiw.. The juror had an application pending.. still pretty flimsy imo.. -—the eventual foreman of the jury failed to reveal that he had been laid off at the law firm he had been working for because of his then-pending application for employment at the FBI.-—
http://www.capdefnet.org/hat/wag.asp
Habeas relief granted to California death row inmate in pre-AEDPA habeas case.
On February 5, 2008, United States Judge Consuelo Marshall of the Central District of California issued an order granting the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed by Richard Raymond Ramirez. Ramirez v. Ayers, CV-91-3802-CBM (C.D. Cal.). Following an evidentiary hearing, she found that the jury foreman affirmatively misrepresented his employment status during voir dire which gave rise to a presumption of bias that was not dispelled at the hearing. (At the time of voir dire, the eventual foreman of the jury failed to reveal that he had been laid off at the law firm he had been working for because of his then-pending application for employment at the FBI.)
Marshall rejected Ramirez’s claim that counsel was ineffective in failing to present an intoxication defense during the guilt-innocence phase of the trial, ruling that Ramirez had failed to establish prejudice. In order to defeat the first-degree murder conviction, Ramirez would have had to raise a reasonable doubt about his intent to rape the victim. In finding it unlikely that he could have done so, Marshall concluded, after an extensive discussion of the evidence: “In this case, the physical evidence and eyewitness testimony established that Ramirez was not so intoxicated that he could not walk, force [the victim] to submit, become sexually aroused, penetrate her vaginally and anally, ejaculate, stab her to death, and then drive himself home. The question the jurors would have asked themselves, therefore, was whether it could reasonably be doubted that Ramirez intended to use force when he committed the act of intercourse. It is not reasonably probable that the jurors would have felt reasonable doubt about this.” The remaining allegations and claims were denied or dismissed.
Probably the wisest words posted to this thread, FRiend.