What’s the Most Outrageous Juror Conduct You’ve Seen?

A. J. J. Delehanty
Jun 13, 2008 3:59 AM CST

One of the legends in our local court is about a courtroom clerk who entered an empty jury room after work to lock up.  He spotted a video in the VCR and assumed it was evidence.  But he found it was a rented movie.  The jury was watching a movie during “deliberations”.

Flag this comment

Richard F. Furia
Jun 13, 2008 5:30 AM CST

In 1973, during my very first homicide trial, I was defending an estranged wife who was charged with Murder I ,  Voluntary Manslaughter, and certain lesser offenses, after fatally stabbing her husband’s paramour in the paramour’s home, to which she had gone, uninvited. My most realistic hopes rested on establishng, that the act was done without premeditation, in the heat and passion of the moment, fueled by a jealous rage, when she saw her husband in the same room with her rival. Apparently the rather animated jury was split 4 to 8 between Murder I and Voluntary Manslaughter when the most vocal of the Murder I minority, a brawny stevedore,  from one of Philadelphia’s scrappy river wards, grabbed a chair in the jury deliberation room and broke it over the back and head of the lead proponent of the lesser offense, during a heated argument.
The trial judge summoned the prosecuting attorney and me back to court from our offices, about 3 hours into deliberations. He called us into his chambers along with the court reporter, and told us about the brawl in the jury room. He then asked whether either of us desired a mistrial, which he said he would be inclined to grant. The prosecuting attorney said, “no”. Realizing that this was a lucky example of the microcosmic world of the jury deliberation room imitating the big world of life, and hoping that the jury would be similarly enlightened,  I declined to request a mistrial.  Twenty minutes later the jury rendered a verdict of “Not guilty of Murder in the First Degree. The reader can guess the rest. Anyway, I was ecstatic, since we had offered to plead to Voluntary Manslaughter before the trial, but that plea was not acceptable to the prosecutor. At the time, the maximum sentence for Voluntary Manslaughter, was 10 years, as opposed to life, or even the electric chair.

Flag this comment

doug
Jun 13, 2008 10:25 AM CST

I once had a jusry reequest approval to watch a mvie during breaks, and chambers conferences. They had picked a comedy which was acceptable to all the jurors and the lawyers,. As the judge, I figured it was the best way to keep them from discussing the case during breaks.It also took a little of the prsure off when we had to settle instructions, deal with motions to dismiss and the like.  IT seemed to work and they aprreciated that we gave them time to finish the movie before closing arguments.

Flag this comment

Suzanne
Jun 13, 2008 3:28 PM CST

I was on a jury for a murder trial where the bailiff had to wake up one of the alternates several times during testimony.  Another day, this person just failed to show up for hours in the morning, keeping everyone waiting.  He didn’t even apologize for being late.

When it came to pass that one of the jurors had an allergic reaction and had to be excused, we were all relieved that the other alternate was the one who wound up on the jury.

Flag this comment

Cindy
Jun 15, 2008 8:35 PM CST

Last summer I interned at the Public Defenders Office and we had a single trial. A young man accused of stealing computers and tv’s from Wal Mart. The PD I was working for tried desperately to get this young man to understand that the testimony against him was very damning and that he should strongly consider the plea offer from the State Attorney.
He refused and instead insisted on going to jury trial.
There were six jurors and at first they all listened attentively. However, when the defendant took the stand on his own behalf (against advice of counsel) the story he told was so incredible that the bailiffs were making “shovel” animations behind the jury box.
What appalled me the most was that there was a woman on the jury who thought that the defendant’s story was so over the top that she couldn’t stop laughing. She spent almost the entire time with her head in her lap and her pad of paper over her face trying to hide it but it was very noticeable. I thought that the story was ridiculous as well, but I would never have laughed. I felt almost as if this wasn’t very serious to her and regardless of how incredible the story was the young man deserved his day in court like everyone else. I was pleased that all of the professionals in the room (save the bailiffs) were composed and took their jobs seriously and they respected the system enough to control whatever urge they may have had to the contrary.

Flag this comment