/.02
Posted on 07/13/2013 4:52:03 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Lawyers and media go into full "what does it mean" mode when during deliberations the jury sends out a question. The lawyers' legs turn to noodles while they wait for the Judge to read the question(s) posed. (A lot can be speculated by jurors' questions.)
The process goes something like this:
- Jurors agree on the question. They write it on to a piece of paper. (No e-mail, texts, or electronic means used to communicate the question.)
- A juror hands it to the deputy / bailiff posted at the jury room door.
- The bailiff walks it to the judge who reads it.
- BY LAW, counsel on both sides must be notified and summoned to court that "the jury has a question."
- After counsel arrive in court the Judge reads the question, on the record.
- The Judge and counsel then discuss a response, how the Judge answer the question.
- The Judge send the jury a written answer, provide the jury what they asked for (a paper document), or even a refusal by the Judge to answer the question.
The question this jury had, two hours into deliberations, you can listen in the video, but it was something like:
"Is there an inventory list of what is in evidence?"
It appears that everyone agreed to provide that to the jury.
What does THAT question mean? Hell, I dunno. My best guesses:
- Asking for an "exhibits list" of ADMITTED evidence two hours into deliberations could mean anything.
1. The jury has reached a verdict and they want a list to make sure they did not miss anything.
or
2. They are NOT near a verdict and thought it would be handy to have an exhibits list to refer to while they deliberate.
or
3. They could be NEAR a verdict, but want to continue to deliberate and want an exhibits list simply because they are being careful. They want to consider all charges and evidence.
or
4. They are near a verdict, but are worried about having targets on their backs, or being responsible for riots (with a not guilty verdict) so they want to appear to have thought long and hard about the verdict.
Note: IMO 3.5 is not that long to deliberate on a two to three week trial (or longer if you include the voir dire process).
I find it very, very interesting that the jury would NOT simply soldier on past 6:00 p.m. This tells me that they were NOT close to reaching a verdict. If they were, they would have stayed past 6:00 p.m. to wrap things up.
This also tells me that the jury is taking their charge (job) very seriously. Many juries would have wanted to reach a verdict simply because they wanted to go home by the weekend, especially if the jury is sequestered like this one.
Regardless of what WE think, George Zimmerman, his counsel, and the prosecution team won't be getting much, if any, sleep tonight.
/.02
BTW, this story is from yesterday afternoon. They get back together at 9 AM Saturday Florida time.y
Group dynamics are coming into play.
I am unable to understand this. How could people you don’t know, whom you will never see again influence you?
I sat on a jury trying a man for murder. He was found guilty of killing his second wife (manslaughter). Later, I found out from the investigating officer that the man had served 20 years for killing his first wife (manslaughter)! The jury was not told about this.
And for the NSA trolls, FU.
I would infer that they intend to go through each exhibit entered and ask “What do we get from it”, then score it almost like a baseball box score: Defense 1, Prosecution 1... In my experience, though, an all woman jury wouldn’t seek out a methodical process (not that there is anything wrong with that - but it is the line of thought typically associated with males). But then again, it may mean nothing.
Guess I should have put a sarcasm tag on that one for you
RE: I think it is possible that a wife of a lawyer who knows she is being called up to be on a jury might talk to her husband about it. Might look on the internet about Martin’s history.
Are they allowed to use the internet or even watch TV?
lol
Not while sequestered
I actually like the tactic of the all woman jury, in this case. First, they will tend to ask themselves: "would I be scared in that situation, and how would that fear affect their thought process". As long as West presented the case with the knowledge that an emotionally determined decision was going to be the result, which I think he did - brilliantly, then all is well. Secondly, women don't like to be bossed around or bullied (by and large). This may allow them to take the less popular route just out of spite. Thirdly, women typically tend to hate people generalizing them (like this statement is) by using preconceived notions of female behavior. This could lead to spirited thought during the deliberation.
No verdict yet..going to back to deliberate
in recess
Hung jury moves.
That’s why I will no longer sit on a jury. Every time I’ve done so (4), I found out later something either damning about the defendant or exculpatory. It can make one cynical to say the least.
My thoughts were much the same : / I pray that these women will recognize the desperate actions of the prosecution, and come to their verdict through reason, rather than fear and emotion.
Dear Lord, please, guide and strengthen us.
Tatt
I can understand it, you’re locked up in a room with 11 other people, some hostile, some obnoxious, some stupid and everyone teamed up and arguing against YOU for hours and days on end.
I don't think that they can have any outside information but a lawyer's wife may be aware of manslaughter sentencing but not necessarily. My guess is that she has been voted as foreman. My hope is that she won't go along to get along with a couple of others who may be unconvinced beyond a shadow of a doubt but living in fear of retribution.
No woodshed from this Freeper....you are spot-on, dear sister.
Spot on.
I made the mistake of reading this editorial a few minutes ago. It’s put me in a very bad mood!
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/trashing-trayvon-article-1.1397657
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.