Posted on 11/22/2018 11:54:07 AM PST by conservative98
This Queens judge apparently likes his jurors — and dry cleaning — to be hung.
Supreme Court Justice Michael Aloise, who stunningly declared a jury deadlocked in the Karina Vetrano murder case after just one day of deliberations, tookadvantage Wednesday of the unexpected time off the quick-draw decision earned him by picking up his laundry.
Modal TriggerMichael Aloise Michael AloiseGregory P. Mango The errand-run came as one of those jurors revealed to The Post that several members of the panel wanted to keep weighing the charges against Chanel Lewis — who is accused of sexually assaulting and strangling the 30-year-old Vetrano on a jogging path in 2016 — when the forewoman sent a note to Aloise saying they were at an impasse.
“We were all not in agreement to end it where it ended,” said the juror, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
“Some of us wanted to think about it some more. That note was sent and people were not ready to end it there. People felt like there could have been more deliberations.”
Aloise wouldn’t say why he didn’t push the panel of 12 jurors to go back and deliberate further — which legal experts called a routine move.
“I’m sorry. I can’t comment on that,” the jurist told a reporter with a smile as he emerged from a car outside his Astoria home with hangers-full of dry cleaning and a Nike duffel bag slung over his shoulder.
“Have a happy Thanksgiving. God bless you.”
Aloise stunned Vetrano’s family and most other observers Tuesday when declared a mistrial in the high-profile case without having first directed the panel togo back andtry to work through their differences, a standard judicial practice known as an “Allen charge."
the juror reached by The Post said the panel was hardly unmovable.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
“Seven of us were going toward not guilty and five of us going toward guilty on the murder charge. After some of us asked to watch the confession video again we voted again and it was the opposite way. Seven said guilty and five said not guilty.”
At that point, the forewoman sent a note saying the jurors were split — even though at least four of them opposed sending the message, the juror said.
“The note that was sent to the judge — we were all not in agreement to end it where it ended. The [forewoman] decided to send a note to ask for help and she was told that there is no way they could help us — to continue and see if we could change each other’s mind — and the note was still sent.
“A lot of people were upset that the note was sent to the judge at the time. Some of us wanted to think about it some more. That note was sent and people were not ready to end it there. People felt like there could have been more deliberations — the same way that two people changed their mind after seeing the video,” the juror said.
“Some of us were shocked, too, like what the hell just happened? It was upsetting. I’m not going to say I wasted my time, but i just feel like it should have been more time,” the juror said.
“It was kind of traumatic for me because I feel it was like a tragedy and I really wanted to see justice.”
Veteran lawyers, too, were floored that Aloise, who’s been a judge since 1999, didn’t send them back to deliberate.
“I have never seen [a mistrial] happen without an Allen charge. Never. The Allen charges normally work,” said defense attorney Sally Butler, a prosecutor in Queens for 15 years.
“Whenever you get that note, that’s the first thing the judge does. There was something definitely up.”
Civil rights lawyer Ron Kuby agreed that the outcome was “unheard of” given the short length of deliberations. “The first deadlock note, in my experience, never hangs the jury unless there is physical violence [among jurors] or other extraneous reasons,” Kuby said.
The panel had deliberated just one hour on Monday and 12 on Tuesday — after hearing a mountain of evidence against Lewis.
“Given the amount of deliberation compared with the length of the trial, it was not a particularly long deliberation,” Kuby noted.
What are the chances that this will be given a second trial?
If it happens, the prosecutor better find a different judge, or the result will be the same.
The defendant appears mentally deficient, but is he some sort of Muslim? That might account for such leniency by the judge.
Some judges will ‘bend over backwards’ to go easy on Muslims.
Just ask several abused children in England, who were told to keep quiet b/c it ‘might upset the new population’.
He had Thanksgiving plans. Can always seat a new jury after Mew Years. 8>P
What’s all the uproar about, just a few thousands of dollars and inconvenience ... /s/
The courts have failed the people
You just now finding that out?
He is going to be retried.
I would far rather give the prosecution a chance to correct the problems the defense brought up and have a do-over than accept the results of a negotiation between jurors for conviction and jurors for acquittal, which might lead to an intermediate verdict (guilty of a lesser charge).
He is going back to jail for another 2 months and then another trial. The prosecution has a strong case and has seen the defense claims. They can now rebut those claims before they are presented, which should produce a just verdict.
I think everyone has it wrong. They are saying the Defense has an advantage after a mistrial, that’s true, but the Prosecution is at a real disadvantage if the jury votes to acquit. When there is an even split among jurors, it’s possible the acquit jurors can create doubt among those that think he’s guilty. Maybe this judge saw an OJ jury and said enough. The judge might have felt there is no way a “reasonable” person could overcome the DNA and a confession and think this guy is not guilty. Now, they get to try another jury instead of having the Prosecution spend years before appeals courts that would not reverse unless something grossly inappropriate happened.
I totally agree, the judge sent a message by not allowing the Allen charge. Notice that liberal lawyer Kuby did not like the Ruling? I think the judge saw that best case, they would always deadlock, and worst case, they would acquit. Why take a chance, get a new Jury that can understand DNA and a confession.
It is much harder to get a conviction on a retrial. The transcript from the first trial will be used to impeach the witnesses. Were you lying then, or are you lying now? People don’t use the exact same words to tell a story every time. I never worked a mistrial that didn’t include an Allen charge.
OJ jury?
If I were her (the victims) family, I would hope and pray that the peep walks for whatever reason. I have three daughters and I have told every boy that they have ever had a relationship with, and their buddy’s, that if they ever harm my girls that I would put them into the ground. Yes, I tell them, that I would probably go to jail for the rest of my life - but you will be dead. Let that man walk and take care of it the way it should be.
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.