General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I don't think Juror B37 and her husband have given up plans to write a book. [View all]DinahMoeHum
(21,786 posts). . .or even perjury regarding "Juror B-37"?
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10023272343
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/A_Juror_Speaks_Her_Mind
If you click on the Esquire link and scroll down/click on the Comments, a certain "Larry Crofford" offers some interesting food for thought:
(snip)
How in the hell did juror B-37, who once held a gun carry permit, get on that jury? People who are not cops or in the military who carry concealed weapons have at least a tiny bit of paranoia in their personalities, i.e., they fear some act of criminal violence could befall them at any moment, and probably buy into certain prejudices against the black people. Vigorous probing during voir dire might have brought her fears and prejudices to light. And were any of the potential jurors asked whether they hoped to get a book deal out of their experience? A not guilty verdict would surely be worth more money for a book than a conviction.
(snip)
I spent 30 years trying serious felonies, 7 as a defense attorney and 23 as a prosecutor, and never had the chance to try a so-called "trial of the century", but I do believe the hope of landing a book deal should be an automatic disqualifier. That's a potential financial interest in the outcome of a case. Once, several years ago, I did have a non-expert witness on the stand who in a non-responsive answer to a question opine that the victim would not have had gunshot residue on his hands because he probably had washed them before going to the police. She admitted that she had no forensic science training, but she did watch CSI on TV. TV viewing habits made it into my voir dire in every frickin' case after that.
(snip)
I've got to wonder why she changed her mind. In some states, not mine, juror misconduct can result in mistrial even after a verdict has been rendered. In my state only the defense can challenge a verdict based on misconduct. Arguably, given her rush to find a book deal, juror B37 may have had a financial interest in getting on that jury. That's a no-no.
(snip)
Just askin'. If any of you DUers are lawyers, I'd appreciate some feedback. Thanks.