Jurors in the trial of a man accused of killing an Indiana University student got "giggly" while sequestered at a hotel, records show -- with men racing each other wearing high heels, food fights, football and Frisbee.
The defense is not amused, but may not be able to do much about it.
Can we do anything about CNN.com writing that headline and wasting our time with a big article trotting out a defense attorney's desperate theory?
পোস্টগুলি
২২টি মন্তব্য:
Gee, they actually had some _fun_ while locked away from their entire life? Shame on them [/sarcasm]
Unless they were trying a cross-dressing football player who killed someone with a frisbee and then had a food fight with the police I don't see anything the defense can latch onto here.
A defense attorney with even less public support than usual. Bloomington is a relatively small town, and after Jill Behrman disappeared in 2000, the community was obsessed. Searches, benefits, you name it (her body wasn't found until 2003). It's the highest profile case in Bloomington since Ellen Marks was murdered and cut into pieces and strewn around the county back in the 80s (they never found all of her). Very politically charged. I suspect the defense attorney can complain all he likes about anything he likes, and it won't get him anywhere.
Sorry to break the news, Derve, but this sort of behavior is not at all uncommon among juries.
I recall trying a murder case in which the drive-by shooting had actually been recorded on video. The jury of course had to watch the grisly thing and listen to the heart-rending testimony of the survivors. But as they deliberated, peals of laughter could be heard coming from the jury room.
"Pretty disrespectful to the dead woman's family, the ensuing publicity."
The Behrmans haven't had any privacy for six years solid. I suspect they're glad that finally, someone was apprehended and convicted of their daughter's murder, after so much time and several false suspects.
tjl -- I laugh and joke when under stress. And I certainly consider watching grisly video and hearing heart-wrenching testimony to be stressful. I don't find the jury's behavior at all surprising.
"Can we do anything about CNN.com?"
Sure. Never turn on the channel and never go to the web site.
But then I have already taken those steps!
Trey
As someone who's been both a prosecutor and a juror, I'm not surprised in the least by this.
I was sequestered for two days on a horrific assault case. We listened to detailed eyewitness and medical testimony and viewed graphic photos. Of course, we weren't allowed to discuss any of this until after the Judge's instructions at the end of the case, and then only in the jury room.
So you have people cooped up in a strange place with no TV, no newspapers and no phone calls allowed, unable to discuss the one topic they share in common and the one topic that is the entire focus of their lives at that time. Most of us were going crazy by the middle of the second day; I can't imagine what it would be like for two weeks.
However, we all understood that when it was time to deliberate, that's what we had to do, and I was impressed at how seriously everyone took their oath.
And, Derve, from the other side, I can tell you that, as a prosecutor, what the victim and/or the family want is that the person(s) who did it be convicted. Period.
12 Bored Men
12 Bored Men
LOL! I'm picturing the earnest Henry Fonda with heels on...
These people did nothing wrong. They were performing their civic duty and taking on unusual burdens putting up with sequestration. For CNN to hold them up to public shame is outrageous.
So you think that in the proximity of news of murder, you're never supposed to laugh and enjoy your life? That's absurd. Why not spend your entire life crying? Death is everywhere, and you're going to die. Better start moping now to demonstrate your awareness of the profundity of it all.
I'm mystified to why this is a story at CNN. Getting giggly, racing in high heels, and food fights may be silly behavior, but "Juror's gone wild"? C'mon! How does CNN's headline pin Animal House behavior on that?
Plus, even if you consider that stuff racy - yeah, foodfights, oh, how out of control!... - there's a difference between acting outrageous in public and doing so in places you feel are private, however temporarily so. The story states the behavior happened at the jurors' hotel. If all those things happened, say, in the parking lot, or the hotel lobby, then okay, you can argue that their behavior was flagrantly disrespectful. But if it happened in their rooms, what then? Would it still be a story?
Granted, I don't see anyone having races of any kind, high heel, flat heel, stilleto, moon boots, whatever in the tight confines of a hotel room, so we can at least grant that that was somewhere not totally private. But still... my point is that what they've published is hardly "juror's gone wild". So unless CNN's understated some of the behavior, or is leaving things out, then to me, this is overblown.
... and in my self defense as a Bloomington resident: The trial was moved up to Morgan County, and I presume the jurors were choosen from that population. So no, us Bloomington-ites don't party like them wild 'n' crazy Martinsville folks. At least, not since some've us turned our ankles trying to race each other in high heels... ;)
Maybe CNN reporters/staff are different. But I can remember lots of gallows humor, and more, while working as a journalist and covering some sad stuff (including murders, plural). Or just in the newsroom, generally. This story strikes me as a little cynical and self-righteous, given the jokes I've heard journalists make over time.
Cops do the same thing. Sometimes doctors. I assume lawyers, on occasion, in certain areas of practice?
It's human.
I'd like to to think I wouldn't have behaved in the same way as these jurors (my days of running in heels are definitely over, anyway), but I don't think it has bearing on their ability to deliberate. Nor do I think it says anything whatsoever with regard to their respect for the victim.
vh: godtnr
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men."
--- Roald Dahl (or Willie Wonka, or Gene Wilder, or somebody or other)
I'm an adult and I don't get into food fights as part of my daily routine. This does sound like pretty juvenile behavior, so the question also comes up whether this jury had the maturity to decide a murder case.
I'm an adult and I don't get into food fights as part of my daily routine.
Is being cooped up inside a hotel with no access to the outside world part of your daily routine?
Derve wrote:
Ask yourselves if that was your dead child, whether you would want this kind of publicity associated with her name?
Derve, have you ever heard of media outlets exercising editorial judgement about whether a story has genuine news value? And when it comes to turning the judicial process into a degraded and degrading freakshow, I'd respectfully suggest CNN's moral high horse is only fit for glue and pet food.
"Bet some of the jurors were uncomfortable later looking her family members in the eyes."
Derve, I bet you've never served on a jury or you wouldn't be making these unrealistic demands. Do you have any idea what sacrifices we ask of jurors? They have to take big chunks of time off from work, studies, or whatever, for which they get only nominal pay. They have to sit through long hours of testimony, much of which is boring or repulsive in nature. They must retire to the jury room whenever certain legal issues need to be resolved outside their presence -- meaning interminable and (to them) incomprehensible delays in the progress of the trial. Finally, they are expected to take very seriously the duty that has been laid on them to do justice -- and amazingly, they always do take their duty seriously.
Our justice system asks so much of jurors as it is -- surely they've earned the right to cut up a little, and not have to wear sackcloth and ashes for the duration of the trial?
Mmmm-mmmm. Really feelin' the love here at Althouse today...
Waah. Waah. Waah.
Geez, you'd think they asked you folks to carry a gun or something.
Eh? You're the one throwing a temper tantrum over juries not being classy enough for your refined tastes.
I've got no problem serving on a jury, and no problem acting however the heck I feel like in my free time while on one. I was just mocking your "you don't *deserve* to be on a classy jury" attitude -- like being on jury duty was some sort of awesome reward that I should be sad on missing out on? Heh.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন