Can you follow jury instructions?

[Buckshot]

For the past week I have been on jury duty. Now that the case is over I wanted to get a feel of how other folks would do given this situation. I won't use names or any identifiers to protect the identity of all involved.

Some of our basic rules were
1. The defendant is to be presumed innocent.
2. The prosecution must prove to us beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant has committed a crime.
3. We are not to use prejudice nor sympathy to sway our decision. Use the evidence only.

There were more but it mostly dealt with not discussing the case or researching it on our own during the trial.

DefendantA was accused of a serious crime by WitnessA and WitnessB. There was no physical evidence at all. The crimes were repeated an uncertain amount of times and were never witnessed by the witnesses at the same time. The witnesses accounts had variables from their initial interviews with the authorities and their testimonies in court.

I guess my question to you folks is, Would you be able to convict on the accusation alone? Would the offence matter?

 

[FoxyWench]

based on the information povided i dont think i could convict, theres no evidence and its their word against his...

in person i think id pay close attention to everyones body language, i think the crime itself might play a part also...

but based on the information given and the rules given, no i dont feel id be ok convicting someone based on a he said she said kind of deal

 

[bubbatd]

I would need evidence of some type .

 

[Snark]

Probably not, by the letter of the law... Still, if 2 different witnesses saw the same crime being committed, independent of each other, that's pretty d*mning... but I'd still want some kind of physical evidence to tie it all together for a conviction.

Maybe the prosecutor should have taken more time to build a stronger case before presenting it to a jury... (Or he ignored some of the evidence gathered - Dad had that happen to him when he was with the FBI; the DA elected not to use some information that would have led to a more serious criminal charge and got the suspect convicted on a lesser charge).

 

[Catsi]

Not based on the evidence provided, no.

 

[ACooper]

That's a tough call for me because I KNOW some crimes have NO physical evidence to present. And some "crimes" can have what APPEARS to be evidence against a person and it's really not actual evidence of a crime at all.

Child abuse and sex crimes come to mind. A sex crime can most definitely be committed and leave no physical evidence if the offender was smart enough to use protection. On the same vein, a sexual act by two consenting adults CAN have physical evidence to present if one party cries foul after it's over.

Child abuse can leave no physical evidence, or at least none that can't be "explained" and leave reasonable doubt to the jury..........again, a person with a clumsy child can be accused and they can present what appears to be "physical evidence" of wounds, past injuries, etc, but no way to be 100% sure those wounds were caused by the accused without witnesses.

Some things MUST be convicted by past behaviors and witness accounts..........as scary as that is, it's how we must function sometimes.

So I guess I would have to know the nature of the crime to answer your question Buck.

 

[sillysally]

I think it would really depend on the crime, the witness accounts, peoples' body language in court, etc. I just could not make a determination without seeing it all in context.

I was recently called for jury duty, and the questions that were asked of us made think that the case was one based on witness accounts rather than physical evidence (we never made it to trial--the judge declared a mistrial before court started).

Personally, I think to go into a trial believing that you absolutely not convict without physical evidence of some kind is a bias of its own.

 

[BostonBanker]

I don't know, but I just got a "pre-jury-duty" form to fill out in the mail the other day, and for some reason it terrifies me. I'm really hoping I just don't get called.

 

[Beanie]

Nope! That's why the judge said "thank you for your candor" and dismissed me.

 

[Buckshot]

This was an accusation of sexual assault on a minor. Two girls one 8 and one 10 at the time. There was no evidence, the girls testimonies were not consistent with their reports to authorities. I wont go in to all the graphic details but penetration never occurred. The person accused was the father by adoption aged 50. He had no history of any run ins with the law other than a DUI in 1979. As for the body language, there was no tell tale signs either way on the defendant or the witnesses/alleged victims.

I was wanting to see if people are willing to risk putting an innocent man in prison for an accusation of this type or allow him his rights even though the alleged crime was particularly nasty. I think the jury I was on would have thrown up their hands and said there wasn't enough evidence if this would have been anything other than what it was. All of the jurors noticed inconsistency, a few were willing to risk error on the side of putting an innocent man in prison rather than allow a possible sex offender to walk free. The jury was hung on 4 accusations and voted not guilty on the other 4. This experience has made me very afraid of a jury of my peers. The jury sat back and made up a bunch of stories and what ifs. They had to be reminded several times that they were not to speculate and judge only on the evidence presented in the courtroom.

 

[ACooper]

This was an accusation of sexual assault on a minor. Two girls one 8 and one 10 at the time. There was no evidence, the girls testimonies were not consistent with their reports to authorities. I wont go in to all the graphic details but penetration never occurred. The person accused was the father by adoption aged 50. He had no history of any run ins with the law other than a DUI in 1979. As for the body language, there was no tell tale signs either way on the defendant or the witnesses/alleged victims.

I was wanting to see if people are willing to risk putting an innocent man in prison for an accusation of this type or allow him his rights even though the alleged crime was particularly nasty. I think the jury I was on would have thrown up their hands and said there wasn't enough evidence if this would have been anything other than what it was. All of the jurors noticed inconsistency, a few were willing to risk error on the side of putting an innocent man in prison rather than allow a possible sex offender to walk free. The jury was hung on 4 accusations and voted not guilty on the other 4. This experience has made me very afraid of a jury of my peers. The jury sat back and made up a bunch of stories and what ifs. They had to be reminded several times that they were not to speculate and judge only on the evidence presented in the courtroom.

In a case like that, I would WANT to be dismissed because I could not be unprejudiced. No way, no how.

In my experience, young children (pre puberty) do not make up allegations like that........at least not unless they are coached by adults who have something to gain by making such charges. And also, young children CAN have story discrepancies due to forgetting certain things, remembering certain things, and just plain not wanting to talk about certain things at certain times. It's how kids are. And if these are now adult girls who are trying to prosecute since they've come of age, I would tend to believe them..........so there goes innocent till proven guilty right out the window, LOL

So no, I could not and would not want to serve on such a jury because I KNOW I could not abide the rules set forth by law and the judge, and I would go in with too many prejudices. I am fair minded enough to know that about myself, LOL

 

[sillysally]

I can honestly say that the fact that there are two separate witnesses/victims of that age saying that the same thing happened makes them more believable to me. Honestly, the fact that what they said to the police and what they said on the stand were not exactly the same does not mean that the crime did not occur. *If* the crime occurred they were young kids who had a traumatic and in their minds, probably shameful, thing happen to them via someone that they trusted. They were asked to recall it for strange police officers and then (likely some time later) asked to sit in front of a court room full of people and recall it again there. I'm a grown woman and I'm sure that I might have some inconsistencies somewhere in my story.....Just sayin'

 

[BostonBanker]

That's when you call in the Lightman Group to figure out what is really going on.

Oh wait. This is real life.

In all seriousness, I'd have an easier time saying "there is no evidence" if it was just one "victim". When there are two people making the same accusation, that's harder to ignore. I don't know how that is reflected in the law.

 

[Buckshot]

In my experience, young children (pre puberty) do not make up allegations like that........at least not unless they are coached by adults who have something to gain by making such charges.

The mother had plenty to gain. These alleged assaults happened soon after discussions of divorce started. It seemed odd to me that the youngest one didn't know that males and females had a different plumbing set up, yet was accusing the defendant of rubbing his privates on her during daylight hours. There was about 2 years of time to coach these kids. There were a number of things to help the defense but to me there was not any evidence. These kids came from a troubled environment prior to their adoption then placed in a troubled home.

I understand that a child can have a very shaky story but that doesn't prove guilt to me either. I asked the prosecution after this was all over, why they didn't pull her from school the next day and have her call her dad from her cell phone and threaten to not come home if he was going to touch her again. I would have loved to hear his reaction to something like that. As traumatic as it would be on a child to allow themselves to be used as bait to gather evidence (in a controlled setting). I cant imagine it would be as bad as knowing that they sought help from the authorities and the authorities let them down. If this guy did anything, which I am certainly not convinced he did, he got away because the prosecution figured that with such a nasty charge he would be found guilty with no evidence. People will be mad at the jury, but the jury for the most part followed the instructions given.

Also I think if it is proven that someone accused someone falsely of a crime like this the punishment should be death by crucification.

 

[Nechochwen]

Seeing as witness testimony is the least reliable evidence that exists, I don't know that I could convict on that alone.

 

[Buckshot]

In all seriousness, I'd have an easier time saying "there is no evidence" if it was just one "victim". When there are two people making the same accusation, that's harder to ignore. I don't know how that is reflected in the law.

I dont know if 2Xbad evidence=guilty. It was hard to ignore, I dont think anyone on this jury ignored anything. In fact the general consensus was they thought he did "something" but there was no proof of anything. The now 12 year olds story was much more graphic than her report to investigators at age 10 but it didnt sound like she had a clue how a mans apparatus works. The now 10 year olds story looked and sounded like she just watched the recording of the investigation, which she did. She had the same mannerisms that she did when she gave the report minus the obvious editing with the mouths out of sinc with the sound. There were obvious edits done with big chunks of time missing, none of these lapses were explained to the jury. When the defense gingerly quizzed her on male genitalia she had no idea that it was different from her own.

 

[ACooper]

I would like to say that MANY girls are touched, fondled and abused sexually and the perpetrator never exposes himself/herself to the victims. It's all one sided touching and looking.

It is completely plausible that the accused could have 'done something' as the jury seemed to think, and also plausible that he could have rubbed himself on either or both of those girls in broad daylight and they never unscrewed their eyeballs to look. Imagine if you can being that little, someone you are supposed to trust doing something that traumatic to you.........you aren't thinking about getting a good look at private areas, your mind is racing on a million things, but looking isn't one of them.

All that said, lack of physical evidence is the very reason so many child molesters DO walk. And I also agree that if someone is found to have FALSELY accused, or put a child up to accuse, there should be a HUGE penalty for that. Because if that man actually WAS innocent it doesn't matter that the jury let him go..........anyone who knows him at all will always look at him differently, he'll probably have to relocate to find any peace, and the accusation will always be on his record.

 

[Renee750il]

Sexual assault is the hot revenge for angry ex-wives/girlfriends nowadays and the people who should be angriest about it are those who have truly suffered sexual assaults. False accusations rob the real victims of dignity and believability.

Not to mention the damage these "loving" mothers do to their children. Imagine, setting your child up to accuse the father figure in their lives of something so heinous, and what a time bomb . . . one day those children are going to have to realize what they did and they're either going to be devastated by shame and guilt, or learn that machinations like that are how you get your way.

The DA should never have even brought charges based on that kind of flimsy evidence. It ruins too many lives to be worthwhile. If that's all there was, there should never have been trial on the docket.