One Angry Man (1 Viewer)

[lombardi]

I got summoned for jury duty one time. I was near the top of the list so I was definitely getting selected or sent home. That's good because if they don't get to your name you keep coming back until they do.

The voir dire begins and they begin asking questions to everybody, one by one. They usually ask a few question and accept the juror. One guy pretends he is racist and they let him go, another begs off with some work issue and they let him go. Everyone gets at least a question or two about their job or something.

They get to me. The prosecuting attorney stands up and says "Please strike juror number blah blah". No question, no discussion. Judge tells me I'm free to go.

Apparently I just LOOKED like a guy who would be too sympathetic to the degenerate wife beater. Must have had that "sure like to beat me some wimmins" look about me that morning. I got to go home, but honestly I was kind of insulted.

 

[TheIronSheik]

When they started asking questions, I raised my had to let them know I had many police friends from when I attended the police academy

You attended the police academy?

I did. At the University of Cincinnati.

 

[TheIronSheik]

I got summoned for jury duty one time. I was near the top of the list so I was definitely getting selected or sent home. That's good because if they don't get to your name you keep coming back until they do.

The voir dire begins and they begin asking questions to everybody, one by one. They usually ask a few question and accept the juror. One guy pretends he is racist and they let him go, another begs off with some work issue and they let him go. Everyone gets at least a question or two about their job or something.

They get to me. The prosecuting attorney stands up and says "Please strike juror number blah blah". No question, no discussion. Judge tells me I'm free to go.

Apparently I just LOOKED like a guy who would be too sympathetic to the degenerate wife beater. Must have had that "sure like to beat me some wimmins" look about me that morning. I got to go home, but honestly I was kind of insulted.

See, I was waiting for the one-on-one questions but they never came. Just the simple questions where people would raise their hands. I was surprised when they announced the jury because I was waiting for them to ask us questions. Never happened.

 

[Zow]

How did you know she had priors? I thought they usually kept that sort of thing out of trials?

It would have stayed out had the defendant chose not to testify. However, when any witness testifies he can be impeached (i.e. his veracity discredited) by certain prior crimes (generally, crimes of dishonesty and any felonies in the last ten years). So, the defense "took the sting" out of the impeachment but simply bringing it up in their direct examination. This is a common strategy and really should only not be used in the rare case where there may actually be a legal issue as to whether the priors fall into the category of being able to be used for impeachment purposes and the issue needs to be preserved correctly for appeal.

Also, the decision whether to testify is one of only two decisions (the other being whether to accept a plea offer) that is completely up to the defendant. The defense attorney definitely will add his two cents,* but for anyone wondering why the defense attorney let her testify it may not have been his decision (of course, the defendant may have needed to testify if that was the only way to get certain pieces of evidence in that were pivotal to the defense's theory of the case.

 

[Zow]

I got summoned for jury duty one time. I was near the top of the list so I was definitely getting selected or sent home. That's good because if they don't get to your name you keep coming back until they do.

The voir dire begins and they begin asking questions to everybody, one by one. They usually ask a few question and accept the juror. One guy pretends he is racist and they let him go, another begs off with some work issue and they let him go. Everyone gets at least a question or two about their job or something.

They get to me. The prosecuting attorney stands up and says "Please strike juror number blah blah". No question, no discussion. Judge tells me I'm free to go.

Apparently I just LOOKED like a guy who would be too sympathetic to the degenerate wife beater. Must have had that "sure like to beat me some wimmins" look about me that morning. I got to go home, but honestly I was kind of insulted.

Assuming you did a voir dire questionnaire you probably provided some information that put you in a category that the prosecutor just didn't want on the trial.

 

[Zow]

One other thing that surprised me was how empty the courtroom was. I'm not sure if no one was allowed in or what, but when we first walked into the room, no one was there. Just the attorneys, us, the judge and a couple cops at the doors. This was all well and good for the most part, as I didn't feel like we were up on a stage, but on Wednesday, I misplayed my delicate dance with my balance. You see, I was terrified that I would eat a big lunch or breakfast and then be forced to take a dump in the small echo chamber of a bathroom connected to the jury room. When people would go in to take a leak, it sounded like a rainstorm on a tin roof. I could only imagine how farts fired into the megaphone bowl of the bathroom equivalent to Carnegie Hall would sound. So I limited my intake.

But this backfired as we sat in a quiet courtroom Wednesday morning. My stomach, hungry for food, began to call out to my brain. Loud, growling sounds similar to what I imagine a dying coyote in the wild would sound like, began to fill the empty void of sound in the room. Panic set in, which I'm sure created more stomach acid, which then created more fuel for the rumbling soundtrack. The downward spiral had begun and I had no means to stop it. With each grumble, I could see heads turn. Sometimes a jury member, sometimes an attorney. The lunch break could not come quick enough.

One other thing that impressed me was the courtroom, itself. I happen to live in one of the richest counties in America. I believe it ranked 25 in the last census. Not gaudy rich, but old money rich. And the courtrooms definitely gave out that same vibe. In Texas, the courtroom looked like a DMV in a strip mall. Not run down, but just very bland. The woodwork in our courtroom was impressive. At times, when the judge and attorneys were in sidebar, I'd find myself staring at the seal hanging from the wall behind the bench carved out of wood. The craftsmanship and detail was mesmerizing. Although, I was confused as to why our county's seal had a huge, tall-ship sail boat on it. It's not like we are even close to the ocean or large body of water. The juror seats were fairly nice. I remember thinking how comfortable they were on Monday and then thinking how uncomfortable they were by Friday.

When we finally entered the courtroom to give our verdict, the courtroom was packed with people. That was a little shocking. I can only assume it was a closed trial? Is that even a thing? I was happy for everything I learned about our court systems and to see how a real trial worked. I was also happy I never decided to become a lawyer, because that has to be an insanely boring job. And I mean no disrespect by that. I just mean that it took us a week to go over this case in court, with the procedures that are necessary when really it could have taken a couple hours.

"I'd like to submit this."

"Any objections?"

"No objections."

"Can I approach?"

"You may."

"I'd like to publish."

"Any objections?"

"No objections."

"You may publish."

100 different times.

Explanations:

1. The empty courtroom/full courtroom I can be explained by the judge's calendar. Generally, judges will block off large parts of their calendars during trial days but still hold some court to keep up with his caseload (the judge probably has over 100 cases in addition to the one that went to trial). The reason the courtroom was empty during your trial is because those times were blocked off and nobody probably cared about a business victim theft trial (plus, as you pointed out, trials are boring). The reason then that the courtroom was packed for the verdict wasn't because people cared that you were bizarro world Henry Fonda. When you went to deliberate the judge didn't know how long you'd take so he set a bunch of other cases. He probably put those on pause when you had your verdict, did your verdict, then picked up where he left off afterwards.

2. Court's boring. I'm sure to the layman the song and dance of admitting evidence seems repetitive and unnecessary. It does to the lawyers too. However, it's gotta be done probably pursuant to a set of rules to ensure that the defendant's rights are protected. Personally, I try to reach stipulations and raise motions before the trial to exhibits I may be objecting to to make the trial run more smoothly, but inevitably there are going to be sidebars and seemingly slow procedures during a trial.

 

[Cjw_55106]

I got called in for duty once. Reported the first two days and had to call in for the rest of the week. Never got questioned or called to sit on the jury. I haven't gotten called back. That was probably ten years ago.

 

[TheIronSheik]

One other thing that surprised me was how empty the courtroom was. I'm not sure if no one was allowed in or what, but when we first walked into the room, no one was there. Just the attorneys, us, the judge and a couple cops at the doors. This was all well and good for the most part, as I didn't feel like we were up on a stage, but on Wednesday, I misplayed my delicate dance with my balance. You see, I was terrified that I would eat a big lunch or breakfast and then be forced to take a dump in the small echo chamber of a bathroom connected to the jury room. When people would go in to take a leak, it sounded like a rainstorm on a tin roof. I could only imagine how farts fired into the megaphone bowl of the bathroom equivalent to Carnegie Hall would sound. So I limited my intake.

But this backfired as we sat in a quiet courtroom Wednesday morning. My stomach, hungry for food, began to call out to my brain. Loud, growling sounds similar to what I imagine a dying coyote in the wild would sound like, began to fill the empty void of sound in the room. Panic set in, which I'm sure created more stomach acid, which then created more fuel for the rumbling soundtrack. The downward spiral had begun and I had no means to stop it. With each grumble, I could see heads turn. Sometimes a jury member, sometimes an attorney. The lunch break could not come quick enough.

One other thing that impressed me was the courtroom, itself. I happen to live in one of the richest counties in America. I believe it ranked 25 in the last census. Not gaudy rich, but old money rich. And the courtrooms definitely gave out that same vibe. In Texas, the courtroom looked like a DMV in a strip mall. Not run down, but just very bland. The woodwork in our courtroom was impressive. At times, when the judge and attorneys were in sidebar, I'd find myself staring at the seal hanging from the wall behind the bench carved out of wood. The craftsmanship and detail was mesmerizing. Although, I was confused as to why our county's seal had a huge, tall-ship sail boat on it. It's not like we are even close to the ocean or large body of water. The juror seats were fairly nice. I remember thinking how comfortable they were on Monday and then thinking how uncomfortable they were by Friday.

When we finally entered the courtroom to give our verdict, the courtroom was packed with people. That was a little shocking. I can only assume it was a closed trial? Is that even a thing? I was happy for everything I learned about our court systems and to see how a real trial worked. I was also happy I never decided to become a lawyer, because that has to be an insanely boring job. And I mean no disrespect by that. I just mean that it took us a week to go over this case in court, with the procedures that are necessary when really it could have taken a couple hours.

"I'd like to submit this."

"Any objections?"

"No objections."

"Can I approach?"

"You may."

"I'd like to publish."

"Any objections?"

"No objections."

"You may publish."

100 different times.

Explanations:

1. The empty courtroom/full courtroom I can be explained by the judge's calendar. Generally, judges will block off large parts of their calendars during trial days but still hold some court to keep up with his caseload (the judge probably has over 100 cases in addition to the one that went to trial). The reason the courtroom was empty during your trial is because those times were blocked off and nobody probably cared about a business victim theft trial (plus, as you pointed out, trials are boring). The reason then that the courtroom was packed for the verdict wasn't because people cared that you were bizarro world Henry Fonda. When you went to deliberate the judge didn't know how long you'd take so he set a bunch of other cases. He probably put those on pause when you had your verdict, did your verdict, then picked up where he left off afterwards.

2. Court's boring. I'm sure to the layman the song and dance of admitting evidence seems repetitive and unnecessary. It does to the lawyers too. However, it's gotta be done probably pursuant to a set of rules to ensure that the defendant's rights are protected. Personally, I try to reach stipulations and raise motions before the trial to exhibits I may be objecting to to make the trial run more smoothly, but inevitably there are going to be sidebars and seemingly slow procedures during a trial.

1. That makes sense. Especially the Bizzaro Henry Fonda part.

2. I totally get that. And I get why it has to be done. But talk about a snooze fest.

 

[shadyridr]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

 

[identikit]

Thanks for serving justice Sheik. This just scares the living #### out of me. And confirms my concerns about the dangerous level of stupidity of people that could be judging me.

I'm a big fan of having professional juries.

Not me.

 

[TheIronSheik]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

I was originally scheduled for the week before Thanksgiving but I had it deferred because I had a trip planned.

 

[Zow]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

 

[sbonomo]

So how did the verdict go?

 

[cstu]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

Trust me, you don't want me on your jury.

 

[Binky The Doormat]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

Trust me, you don't want me on your jury.

Wait, what? shadyridr = ctsu?

 

[shadyridr]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

nobody really wants to do jury duty bro. But yeah I wasn't gonna make up an excuse or something just hoping I wasn't picked.

 

[shadyridr]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

Trust me, you don't want me on your jury.

Wait, what? shadyridr = ctsu?

oops

 

[Jaysus]

Last night's episode of The New Girl was timely....

 

[MikeIke]

I've been on jury duty twice. I really enjoyed it, but that may be because I got picked to server on a murder trial both times. If I had to sit on some accounting case I may feel differently.

 

[TheIronSheik]

So how did the verdict go?

What do you mean?

Got my check yesterday in the mail. $111! I was not expecting a check that big. It was a nice little bonus check for sitting in a chair for 5 days.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

So how did the verdict go?

What do you mean?

Got my check yesterday in the mail. $111! I was not expecting a check that big. It was a nice little bonus check for sitting in a chair for 5 days.

Where I work I would have had to sign the check over to my employer. For doing so I would receive my regular salary for the days I was called to jury duty. Keeping the check would be my option, but then the days away on jury duty would have to have been vacation days.

 

[TheIronSheik]

So how did the verdict go?

What do you mean?

Got my check yesterday in the mail. $111! I was not expecting a check that big. It was a nice little bonus check for sitting in a chair for 5 days.

Where I work I would have had to sign the check over to my employer. For doing so I would receive my regular salary for the days I was called to jury duty. Keeping the check would be my option, but then the days away on jury duty would have to have been vacation days.

My boss had mentioned something like that, too. I've never heard of that. But I've also never been on a jury, so that's not surprising. Why do they do that? And what happens if you had decided to donate the check at the beginning? I know a couple of the other jurors donated theirs because they thought they were only going to get a $7 check.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

So how did the verdict go?

What do you mean?

Got my check yesterday in the mail. $111! I was not expecting a check that big. It was a nice little bonus check for sitting in a chair for 5 days.

Where I work I would have had to sign the check over to my employer. For doing so I would receive my regular salary for the days I was called to jury duty. Keeping the check would be my option, but then the days away on jury duty would have to have been vacation days.

My boss had mentioned something like that, too. I've never heard of that. But I've also never been on a jury, so that's not surprising. Why do they do that? And what happens if you had decided to donate the check at the beginning? I know a couple of the other jurors donated theirs because they thought they were only going to get a $7 check.

I could only speculate.

As for turning the check over to the boss, well that does corroborate that you were actually at jury duty and not just making an excuse for not being at work. Whether that is the reason, I do not know.

 

[cstu]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

Trust me, you don't want me on your jury.

Wait, what? shadyridr = ctsu?

No, just like shady I refuse to do jury duty.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

Trust me, you don't want me on your jury.

Wait, what? shadyridr = ctsu?

No, just like shady I refuse to do jury duty.

I would love to be on a jury. Called three times, never picked. Not surprising given my profession.

 

[cstu]

I would love to be on a jury. Called three times, never picked. Not surprising given my profession.

So all you have to do is say you're a lawyer and you won't get picked?

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

I got called to jury duty once. Was thinking of how I can get out of it. It was a drug case and one of the questions to us jurors was if we knew any of the witnesses and they read off a long list of names. What are the odds one of the witnesses was my doctor so I was excused. I remember being so nervous because it was a drug trial that was supposed to take a week right around thanksgiving time

Trust me, you don't want me on your jury.

Wait, what? shadyridr = ctsu?

No, just like shady I refuse to do jury duty.

Dootch

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I would love to be on a jury. Called three times, never picked. Not surprising given my profession.

So all you have to do is say you're a lawyer and you won't get picked?

Very few lawyers want lawyers on their juries. I have allowed one criminal defense attorney on one of my juries. Guy was the foreman (as I thought). the jury returned guilty verdicts on all counts. After the trial th eguy sought me out to ask why I allowed him to stay on the panel.

 

[TheIronSheik]

I would love to be on a jury. Called three times, never picked. Not surprising given my profession.

So all you have to do is say you're a lawyer and you won't get picked?

Very few lawyers want lawyers on their juries. I have allowed one criminal defense attorney on one of my juries. Guy was the foreman (as I thought). the jury returned guilty verdicts on all counts. After the trial th eguy sought me out to ask why I allowed him to stay on the panel.

And your answer was?

 

[cstu]

Dootch

Correct.

 

[sbonomo]

So how did the verdict go?

What do you mean?

Got my check yesterday in the mail. $111! I was not expecting a check that big. It was a nice little bonus check for sitting in a chair for 5 days.

Was the lady convicted and if so what sentence did she receive (i am on my phone so hopefully you didn't post earlier)? Was there any cool back and forth with your fellow juror's? Any other random thoughts about the deliberation process?

 

[TheIronSheik]

So how did the verdict go?

What do you mean?

Got my check yesterday in the mail. $111! I was not expecting a check that big. It was a nice little bonus check for sitting in a chair for 5 days.

Was the lady convicted and if so what sentence did she receive (i am on my phone so hopefully you didn't post earlier)? Was there any cool back and forth with your fellow juror's? Any other random thoughts about the deliberation process?

Ahh. I think I posted this, but if not, here are the deets:

If I remember correctly, we found her guilty of 10 of 16 charges? Maybe 14. They were sub sectioned so I'm not exactly sure. 2 counts of Forgery, 2 counts of Forgery: Uttering, 2 counts of Forgery: (forget this one), 1 count of theft, 1 count of receiving stolen property and 2 counts of attempted theft (2 checks she wrote bounced). These may not be the "official names" of the counts, but it was something like that. We found her guilty of the big ones.

As far as the back and forth, I really think there were 2 or 3 people who felt she was guilty, but went with not guilty because that's what the "crowd" was doing. Because after I started explaining my reasons, they came aboard pretty quick. For most everyone else, it was really just a case of trying to explain to them what "reasonable doubt" was. One lady kept saying things like, "What if he was having an affair with her and he promised her money, but she didn't want to bring it up in front of the courtroom because she was ashamed of the affair?" Then 5 other people would go, "That makes sense. And it is reasonable doubt." It was insane! They kept coming up with these wild stories that they were just making up and claiming that the prosecution never proved it couldn't be true.

I think the main thing was, the defense attorney painted her as the victim, and he did a pretty good job of trying to convince the jury to put themselves in her position. And how would they feel if they were wrongly accused of a crime. To me, that seems like "Defense Attorney Tactics 101." Like I said, I give him a lot of credit. I felt like he took a case that was a solid slam dunk for the Commonwealth and he almost turned it into a complete win.

I haven't seen an article with what she was sentenced to yet, but I did see a follow up article that said she'll probably get a harsh sentence because not only was she found guilty, but her past sentence prohibited her from working as a bookkeeper. So she was in violation of that, as well as the new charges.

 

[Kanil]

I got put on jury duty once for a dude that was stealing money from the quarter machines at different car washes. He started in California, moved through Nevada, Utah, got caught in western Colorado, skipped bail, got caught again in Denver. I was on the Denver jury. He had fired 3 of his court appointed lawyers in a row and so he had to represent himself with a lawyer that was assigned to help him. Dude had like 27 counts that he got nailed for. Something like 18 years consecutive and he still had to go to court for skipping bail. He was ####ed.

On the plus side, I now know how to steal $$$ from just about any change machine out there!

 

[kentric]

The questions they ask prospective jurors aren't generally black and white. One standard is: would you be more or less likely to believe evidence from a police officer than a non-police officer. I said it would depend on the situation.

I remember one time being seated as a prospective juror through the first round of cutoffs and then being excused by the defense with one of their exceptions. Guess they didn't like my attitude as I was just sitting in the jury box reading a book.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

How did you know she had priors? I thought they usually kept that sort of thing out of trials?

There are a couple of exceptions. If the crime involved a false statement, it is admissible for impeachment. It's also generally admissible to show a pattern or habit or conduct under FRE 406 (and state equivalents).

 

[TheIronSheik]

How did you know she had priors? I thought they usually kept that sort of thing out of trials?

There are a couple of exceptions. If the crime involved a false statement, it is admissible for impeachment. It's also generally admissible to show a pattern or habit or conduct under FRE 406 (and state equivalents).

The prosecutor brought up the former employer as one of the witnesses. She testified that the defendant did the exact same thing at her business. It wasn't until the defense put the defendant on the stand that we found out about the 2nd arrest.

After she mentioned the 2nd arrest, the defense attorney asked her about a specific detail. She paused and said, "Am I allowed to mention that on the stand?" The defense said, "Strike that. Let's move on." The judge and the attorneys followed that up with a quick sidebar. When we went back to deliberate, most jurors decided that the prosecutors had somehow barred her from being allowed to bring up something that would aid her alibi. They saw the act as a big win for the defense. It wasn't until I was out of the court that I read about all of the details of her 2nd arrest. It was obviously a ploy done by the defense to make it sound favorable to them. And it really worked. That was the main reason she was found not guilty of every other charge.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

How did you know she had priors? I thought they usually kept that sort of thing out of trials?

There are a couple of exceptions. If the crime involved a false statement, it is admissible for impeachment. It's also generally admissible to show a pattern or habit or conduct under FRE 406 (and state equivalents).

The prosecutor brought up the former employer as one of the witnesses. She testified that the defendant did the exact same thing at her business. It wasn't until the defense put the defendant on the stand that we found out about the 2nd arrest.

After she mentioned the 2nd arrest, the defense attorney asked her about a specific detail. She paused and said, "Am I allowed to mention that on the stand?" The defense said, "Strike that. Let's move on." The judge and the attorneys followed that up with a quick sidebar. When we went back to deliberate, most jurors decided that the prosecutors had somehow barred her from being allowed to bring up something that would aid her alibi. They saw the act as a big win for the defense. It wasn't until I was out of the court that I read about all of the details of her 2nd arrest. It was obviously a ploy done by the defense to make it sound favorable to them. And it really worked. That was the main reason she was found not guilty of every other charge.

Not sure it's a ploy. The Defense likely reconsidered how far they wanted to open the door on impeachment. If the Defendant concedes the arrest, and nothing else, there's nothing really to impeach. She's already admitted to the conviction. That leaves only a much narrower window open (for instance if the defendant testified that the checks were altered or cashed by mistake).

 

[TheIronSheik]

How did you know she had priors? I thought they usually kept that sort of thing out of trials?

There are a couple of exceptions. If the crime involved a false statement, it is admissible for impeachment. It's also generally admissible to show a pattern or habit or conduct under FRE 406 (and state equivalents).

The prosecutor brought up the former employer as one of the witnesses. She testified that the defendant did the exact same thing at her business. It wasn't until the defense put the defendant on the stand that we found out about the 2nd arrest.

After she mentioned the 2nd arrest, the defense attorney asked her about a specific detail. She paused and said, "Am I allowed to mention that on the stand?" The defense said, "Strike that. Let's move on." The judge and the attorneys followed that up with a quick sidebar. When we went back to deliberate, most jurors decided that the prosecutors had somehow barred her from being allowed to bring up something that would aid her alibi. They saw the act as a big win for the defense. It wasn't until I was out of the court that I read about all of the details of her 2nd arrest. It was obviously a ploy done by the defense to make it sound favorable to them. And it really worked. That was the main reason she was found not guilty of every other charge.

Not sure it's a ploy. The Defense likely reconsidered how far they wanted to open the door on impeachment. If the Defendant concedes the arrest, and nothing else, there's nothing really to impeach. She's already admitted to the conviction. That leaves only a much narrower window open (for instance if the defendant testified that the checks were altered or cashed by mistake).

Well if it wasn't a ploy, his simple act of changing his mind mid stream helped him get not guilty verdicts on 6 charges. If I was him, I'd say that was the plan the whole time.

 

[TheIronSheik]

How did you know she had priors? I thought they usually kept that sort of thing out of trials?

There are a couple of exceptions. If the crime involved a false statement, it is admissible for impeachment. It's also generally admissible to show a pattern or habit or conduct under FRE 406 (and state equivalents).

The prosecutor brought up the former employer as one of the witnesses. She testified that the defendant did the exact same thing at her business. It wasn't until the defense put the defendant on the stand that we found out about the 2nd arrest.

After she mentioned the 2nd arrest, the defense attorney asked her about a specific detail. She paused and said, "Am I allowed to mention that on the stand?" The defense said, "Strike that. Let's move on." The judge and the attorneys followed that up with a quick sidebar. When we went back to deliberate, most jurors decided that the prosecutors had somehow barred her from being allowed to bring up something that would aid her alibi. They saw the act as a big win for the defense. It wasn't until I was out of the court that I read about all of the details of her 2nd arrest. It was obviously a ploy done by the defense to make it sound favorable to them. And it really worked. That was the main reason she was found not guilty of every other charge.

Not sure it's a ploy. The Defense likely reconsidered how far they wanted to open the door on impeachment. If the Defendant concedes the arrest, and nothing else, there's nothing really to impeach. She's already admitted to the conviction. That leaves only a much narrower window open (for instance if the defendant testified that the checks were altered or cashed by mistake).

Well if it wasn't a ploy, his simple act of changing his mind mid stream helped him get not guilty verdicts on 6 charges. If I was him, I'd say that was the plan the whole time.

Also, the reason it seemed like a ploy was the way it was "acted" out. It just seemed odd for her to question her attorney's question. It wasn't like he was cross examining her. I assume that attorney go over the questions they are going to ask their clients, no? I could be wrong on that, but it just seemed very odd the way it went down.

 

[RealReactions]

Is this west chester, Pa? Off subject but I go to West Chester University and was hoping sheik could point out maybe bars a little farther away from campus that are good. Or maybe even get me a part time job

 

[TheIronSheik]

Is this west chester, Pa? Off subject but I go to West Chester University and was hoping sheik could point out maybe bars a little farther away from campus that are good. Or maybe even get me a part time job

It is West Chester. But I'm not sure how I'd be able to help you with that. As far as a job, I already have Eminence as my intern.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Is this west chester, Pa? Off subject but I go to West Chester University and was hoping sheik could point out maybe bars a little farther away from campus that are good. Or maybe even get me a part time job

It is West Chester. But I'm not sure how I'd be able to help you with that. As far as a job, I already have Eminence as my intern.

My wife used to live in Media. She swears she played Jr Hi volleyball/basketball against Tina Fey (Upper Darby).

 

[TheIronSheik]

Is this west chester, Pa? Off subject but I go to West Chester University and was hoping sheik could point out maybe bars a little farther away from campus that are good. Or maybe even get me a part time job

It is West Chester. But I'm not sure how I'd be able to help you with that. As far as a job, I already have Eminence as my intern.

My wife used to live in Media. She swears she played Jr Hi volleyball/basketball against Tina Fey (Upper Darby).

That's Delaware County. Delco. One county over.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Is this west chester, Pa? Off subject but I go to West Chester University and was hoping sheik could point out maybe bars a little farther away from campus that are good. Or maybe even get me a part time job

It is West Chester. But I'm not sure how I'd be able to help you with that. As far as a job, I already have Eminence as my intern.

My wife used to live in Media. She swears she played Jr Hi volleyball/basketball against Tina Fey (Upper Darby).

That's Delaware County. Delco. One county over.

Ahhh

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

How did you know she had priors? I thought they usually kept that sort of thing out of trials?

There are a couple of exceptions. If the crime involved a false statement, it is admissible for impeachment. It's also generally admissible to show a pattern or habit or conduct under FRE 406 (and state equivalents).

The prosecutor brought up the former employer as one of the witnesses. She testified that the defendant did the exact same thing at her business. It wasn't until the defense put the defendant on the stand that we found out about the 2nd arrest.

After she mentioned the 2nd arrest, the defense attorney asked her about a specific detail. She paused and said, "Am I allowed to mention that on the stand?" The defense said, "Strike that. Let's move on." The judge and the attorneys followed that up with a quick sidebar. When we went back to deliberate, most jurors decided that the prosecutors had somehow barred her from being allowed to bring up something that would aid her alibi. They saw the act as a big win for the defense. It wasn't until I was out of the court that I read about all of the details of her 2nd arrest. It was obviously a ploy done by the defense to make it sound favorable to them. And it really worked. That was the main reason she was found not guilty of every other charge.

Not sure it's a ploy. The Defense likely reconsidered how far they wanted to open the door on impeachment. If the Defendant concedes the arrest, and nothing else, there's nothing really to impeach. She's already admitted to the conviction. That leaves only a much narrower window open (for instance if the defendant testified that the checks were altered or cashed by mistake).

Well if it wasn't a ploy, his simple act of changing his mind mid stream helped him get not guilty verdicts on 6 charges. If I was him, I'd say that was the plan the whole time.

Also, the reason it seemed like a ploy was the way it was "acted" out. It just seemed odd for her to question her attorney's question. It wasn't like he was cross examining her. I assume that attorney go over the questions they are going to ask their clients, no? I could be wrong on that, but it just seemed very odd the way it went down.

Yes, but lawyers also have brain farts all the time.

On a more general level, the point of having side bar conversations is because there are things that the jury isn't supposed to hear because it may be inadmissible or unduly prejudicial. It defeats the purpose of having those conversations in (relative) confidence, if the jury is speculating as to the content of those conversations. It's one of those cases where, to a lawyer, hearing about a jury's deliberations is like watching the sausage get made. We kind of cringe.

 

[TheIronSheik]

How did you know she had priors? I thought they usually kept that sort of thing out of trials?

There are a couple of exceptions. If the crime involved a false statement, it is admissible for impeachment. It's also generally admissible to show a pattern or habit or conduct under FRE 406 (and state equivalents).

The prosecutor brought up the former employer as one of the witnesses. She testified that the defendant did the exact same thing at her business. It wasn't until the defense put the defendant on the stand that we found out about the 2nd arrest.

After she mentioned the 2nd arrest, the defense attorney asked her about a specific detail. She paused and said, "Am I allowed to mention that on the stand?" The defense said, "Strike that. Let's move on." The judge and the attorneys followed that up with a quick sidebar. When we went back to deliberate, most jurors decided that the prosecutors had somehow barred her from being allowed to bring up something that would aid her alibi. They saw the act as a big win for the defense. It wasn't until I was out of the court that I read about all of the details of her 2nd arrest. It was obviously a ploy done by the defense to make it sound favorable to them. And it really worked. That was the main reason she was found not guilty of every other charge.

Not sure it's a ploy. The Defense likely reconsidered how far they wanted to open the door on impeachment. If the Defendant concedes the arrest, and nothing else, there's nothing really to impeach. She's already admitted to the conviction. That leaves only a much narrower window open (for instance if the defendant testified that the checks were altered or cashed by mistake).

Well if it wasn't a ploy, his simple act of changing his mind mid stream helped him get not guilty verdicts on 6 charges. If I was him, I'd say that was the plan the whole time.

Also, the reason it seemed like a ploy was the way it was "acted" out. It just seemed odd for her to question her attorney's question. It wasn't like he was cross examining her. I assume that attorney go over the questions they are going to ask their clients, no? I could be wrong on that, but it just seemed very odd the way it went down.

Yes, but lawyers also have brain farts all the time.

On a more general level, the point of having side bar conversations is because there are things that the jury isn't supposed to hear because it may be inadmissible or unduly prejudicial. It defeats the purpose of having those conversations in (relative) confidence, if the jury is speculating as to the content of those conversations. It's one of those cases where, to a lawyer, hearing about a jury's deliberations is like watching the sausage get made. We kind of cringe.

One of the jurors argued in deliberations because she said she thought she heard something they said when they were at a sidebar. I was like, "You can't use that." She couldn't understand why.

 

[NREC34]

Is this west chester, Pa? Off subject but I go to West Chester University and was hoping sheik could point out maybe bars a little farther away from campus that are good. Or maybe even get me a part time job

It is West Chester. But I'm not sure how I'd be able to help you with that. As far as a job, I already have Eminence as my intern.

Does Em know you are not white? ?

 

[Loan Sharks]

Good work Sheik.....even though I have no idea if she was innocent.

Sheik says she did it, ##### did it.

 

[tdoss]

I got summoned for jury duty one time. I was near the top of the list so I was definitely getting selected or sent home. That's good because if they don't get to your name you keep coming back until they do.

The voir dire begins and they begin asking questions to everybody, one by one. They usually ask a few question and accept the juror. One guy pretends he is racist and they let him go, another begs off with some work issue and they let him go. Everyone gets at least a question or two about their job or something.

They get to me. The prosecuting attorney stands up and says "Please strike juror number blah blah". No question, no discussion. Judge tells me I'm free to go.

Apparently I just LOOKED like a guy who would be too sympathetic to the degenerate wife beater. Must have had that "sure like to beat me some wimmins" look about me that morning. I got to go home, but honestly I was kind of insulted.

You just got a look that causes people to react..."We don't get many of your kind around here."

 

[tdoss]

My only time in a courtroom was to watch a trial of one of my in-laws on a blatantly bogus charge. When I saw the motley crew that made up the jury, I vowed never to try to get out of jury duty. It was embarrassing to think that was a jury of his peers...

Gotta remember...the jury is full of people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty.