The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

A few years ago I posted the progress of the first murder trial I helped prosecute. Well, on March 8th, we'll start picking a jury for my 2nd murder case. This one is a "capital" murder case. The witnesses suck. The evidence is weaker; however, because y'all liked the "play by play" the first time, I'll use this thread to give you the "play by play" for this trial.

Jury selection begins March 8th. The trial should begin on March 15th.

I'll be back then.

What exactly is a "capital" murder trial? How's that different than the first one?

"Capital" simply means that the Death Penalty does apply.

Thanks!

Death by boiling water...ahhhhh

JansenFan wrote:Death by boiling water...ahhhhh

Stop following me around with your Pro-eating-lobster views!!!

Uh-oh.
Somebody has tweaked a sensitive nerve in a tasmanian devil. I've seen all the cartoons, Tonto. It's bad.
Save yourself.

Don't bother hiding behind a tree, it's not going to work.

Why is it a Capital case, murder and what?

Like curveball already pointed out..."Capital" murder is where the death penalty may be imposed. My first murder trial was a "non-capital" case...so he got life in prison. To be sentenced to death, there has to be a conviction for Murder in the First Degree (of course) and the jury has to conclude that certain aggravating factors exist and those aggravating factors outweigh any mitigating factors...ultimately leading them to recommend death to the judge.

First things first, we have to convict the guy. That is the first step in the process. Our three "star" witnesses will be:

1) a crack-whore who was drunk on the night of the murder;

2) a wannabe gangsta who hung out with the defendant that night...who gave about 7 different versions of the events as they took place that night;

and

3) another young thug who was good friends with the defendant...who we gave "immunity" to for his testimony.

See what I mean?

so how are you "sure" he did it? were you there. or are you basing it on the shaky witness comments? if everything i so shaky, where is the certain stuff?


i see life in prison at best.

now if there were an eye witness....... or maybe there's something you're not telling us?

For those that missed the 1st trial

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic. ... sc&start=0

and

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic. ... 27&start=0

Enjoy

Thanks again JH

Can’t wait for this one

hailskins666 wrote:so how are you "sure" he did it? were you there. or are you basing it on the shaky witness comments? if everything i so shaky, where is the certain stuff?

Well...there's "knowing" someone is guilty and being able to "prove" he's guilty. Two different things.

If I had any doubts as to whether the defendant did it, then I am professionally obligated not to prosecute this case.

If you personally didn't believe in the death penalty, could you and would you still prosecute the case?

I only ask because most of us get to have opinions on very serious issues that we are never actually confronted with having to act on. I think it would be interesting to hear from someone who is actually involved in something so serious.

That's a good question, cvillehog. Personally, I'm not aware of any prosecutor in my office that doesn't believe in the death penalty. If one exists, I suppose he/she would have to approach their superiors and inform them of their opposition to participating in a capital murder trial.

As for me, jury selection begins tomorrow, March 8th. This will likely be very very boring and will likely take several days. Usually, we're able to pick a jury in 2-3 hours tops...but, in a capital murder trial, it takes much longer because you have to "death qualify" a jury. In other words, you have to weed out people that are so against the death penalty that they will not impose it....ever. Understand?

If the jury find him guilty, can they recommend a sentence or is that purely up to the judge

Will the names be changed to protect the...not so innocent?

Amberion wrote:If the jury find him guilty, can they recommend a sentence or is that purely up to the judge

The jury "recommends" whether a death sentence should be imposed. The final decision is up to the judge.

chaddukes wrote:Will the names be changed to protect the...not so innocent?

Yes, I will not be offering any names (other than the defendant's). I'll be referring to them as "Witness #1, Witness #2, etc."

Justice Hog wrote:

chaddukes wrote:Will the names be changed to protect the...not so innocent?

Yes, I will not be offering any names (other than the defendant's). I'll be referring to them as "Witness #1, Witness #2, etc."

Or:
1) Drunk Crack-whore;
2) Gangsta Wannabe;
and the ever popular...
3) Young Thug!

Jury Selection - Day One

Okay, today was a short day. Here is what happened:

A panel of 119 prospective jurors was brought into the court room. (This # is incredibly small! We usually get 200+ for capital murder cases.) The jurors were then assigned to different groups of "8" beginning with "Group A" and ending with "Group O". Each group will be assigned a time to come back in the next few days for individual questioning.

Today, the entire jury panel was asked several questions. If they answered "yes" to any of these questions, they were asked to remain and explain why. Those questions were:

1. It is expected that at the conclusion of the case, during your deliberations, the jury will be sequestered, that is, restricted from going home in the evenings and having contact with outside persons including your family. Would you have any difficulty serving if the jury was sequestered in this manner?

2. Persons over 70 years of age are exempt from jury service at their request. If you are over 70, do you wish to claim this exemption?

3. Do you or any members of you immediate family know the attorneys in this case [names given] or any other attorney of the offices of the Attorney General or defense counsel?

4. Do you or any member of your immediate family know the defendant or the deceased? [names given]

5. Do you know any of the following persons who might be called to testify as a witness? [witness names given]

After these questions were read, the jurors that answered "no" were permitted to leave. The jurors that answered "yes" where asked to stay and explain their "yes" answer.

After doing that, the Court excused 42 jurors, bringing our number down to only 77.

Tomorrow we will begin the tedious process of meeting jurors individually and making sure they are not oppposed to the death penalty, etc. This is where it's going to be very very boring.

Basic Story of the Case

While I have a few seconds here, let me explain the basic story of the case.

Defendant and victim are both local drug dealers. The victim apparently stole some money and drugs from the defendant which led to some bad feelings between the two. Prior to the shooting, the defendant was making comments to some local people that the victim better "watch out".

On the night of the homicide, the victim/defendant were seen arguing around midnight by a witness. Later that night, the same witness saw the victim near her house and she asked him to get some drugs for her. After that, the witness saw the victim go down a path...followed by the defendant. This is the same path where the victim was found the next day. The likely arguments against this witness was that she was drunk that night and she smokes crack constantly; therefore, she is unable to perceive things going on around her.

We also have two other witnesses, the two friends of the defendant. Both dropped defendant off in the area of the murder that night...and then picked him up, after he ran to the car from the direction of the murder scene, on a street about 25 yards away from where the body was found. When they picked him up, the defendant..out of breath...said, "I just shot [victim's name]." They then all drove to Philly and ditched the gun on the way up there.

The arguments against these guys will likely be: (a) one gave 7+ different versions of the story that night, and (b) the other one we gave immunity to for his testimony.

Oh! I guess y'all need to know that I did material witness warrants for the crack user and the guy who gave 7 different versions of his story...because I didn't think they were even going to appear for trial. Now, they're both in prison and will remain there until this trial is over.

Other than that, we'll have the normal witnesses (police officers, medical examiner, ballistics, etc.); however, these will be our MAIN witnesses that put the defendant there.

Okay, now you're all clued in on the story. Let's see how it plays out.

Great update JH. Keep em coming.

Hey JH,

Good Luck.

Question on the material witness thing. This might sound dumb, but I have never really understood what 'Material Witness' really means.

FYI

I went back and edited several of my posts, including the title of the thread. The rules of professional responsibility preclude me from commenting on a case and giving my opinions about a case while it is still pending.

Consequently, I have decided to make the case "JOHN DOE" and, from here on out, to simply try to "report" what happens each day without giving my thoughts as to the credibility of what happened. I'll leave those comments up to y'all.

I'm on a little break right now..so I could update this thread. I'll post more information later with what happened today.

Justice Hog wrote:FYI

I went back and edited several of my posts, including the title of the thread. The rules of professional responsibility preclude me from commenting on a case and giving my opinions about a case while it is still pending.

Consequently, I have decided to make the case "JOHN DOE" and, from here on out, to simply try to "report" what happens each day without giving my thoughts as to the credibility of what happened. I'll leave those comments up to y'all.

I'm on a little break right now..so I could update this thread. I'll post more information later with what happened today.

I think thats wise. We'd hate to see you get in trouble!

Chad

Jury Selection - Day Two

Okay, now is where the fun begins. When picking a jury, you should first understand that there are two ways to challenge a prospective juror: (1) for cause; and (2) a peremptory challenge. A challenge "for cause" means that something the juror said is causing sufficient concern to either side justifying that juror to be excused for serving. A "peremptory" challenge can result in the juror being excluded for any reason under the sun (except the juror's race, sex, etc.). There are an unlimited number of challenges for "cause". As for the peremptory challenges, the defense is permitted "20" and the State is permitted "12" in capital murder cases.

Moving on.

We met 38 jurors today. Each juror was asked the following questions:

1. This case involves allegations relating to the shooting death of [victim’s name]. Have you read or heard anything about this case through the news media or any other source?

2. Have you formed or expressed any opinion about the guilty or innocence of the defendant?

3. Do you have any bias for or against the State or the defendant?

4. Have you formed or expressed an opinion concerning whether or not the defendant in this case should be given the death penalty?

5. Do you have any religious, conscientious or other opposition to the death penalty?

6. Would the fact that the death penalty might be imposed by the Court affect your ability to fairly and impartially decide what verdict to return on the First Degree Murder charge?

7. Do you believe that the death penalty is the only appropriate punishment for persons convicted of Murder in the First Degree?

8. If you were sure beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty of murder, would you be able to consider a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole?

9. If the facts and circumstances justify it: (a) could you find a verdict of guilty? (b) could you find a verdict of not guilty? (c) could you recommend a sentence of death? (d) could your recommend a sentence of life imprisonment?

10. Are you or a close friend or relative employed by any organization which represents the interests of criminal defendants or crime victims?

11. Have you or a close friend or relative ever been a victim or witness to a violent crime?

12. Have you or a close friend or relative ever been charged with a criminal offense other than a traffic offense?

13. Are you presently under investigation with respect to any alleged criminal offense?

14. Have you or any member of your immediate family or a close friend or relative been treated for substance abuse concerning controlled substances, such as marijuana, heroin or cocaine?

15. Do you have any opinions concerning individuals who sell or consume illegal drugs that would prevent you from rendering a fair and impartial verdict?

16. Do you suffer from any physical or mental condition which would adversely affect your ability to serve as a juror?

17. Have you, a relative or close friend ever worked for the following: (a) Federal, State or local law enforcement agency? (b) Office of a prosecutor like the Attorney General or the United States Attorney? (c) Any law office? (d) Any agency involved in the criminal justice field?

18. It is expected that police officers will testify during the trial. Would you accept or reject the testimony of a police officer more readily than that of another person merely because he/she is a police officer?

19. The crimes in question occurred at [location of crime]. Are you familiar with that area?

20. It is expected that you will see photographs of [victim’s] body showing the wounds he suffered. Would viewing such photographs make it difficult for you to render a fair and impartial verdict?

21. A defendant in a criminal case has the constitutional right not to testify, and the exercise of that right may not be used against him. If [defendant] elects not to testify, would that affect your ability to render a fair and impartial verdict?

22. Do you believe you would be able to render a fair and impartial verdict based solely on the evidence and not be influenced by sympathy, prejudice or public opinion.

23. Do you have any questions or concerns that you would like to raise at this point?

After asking all of the jurors these questions, several were excused for "cause". The defense also exercised "9" of their peremptory challenges. The State used only "3". At the end of the day, we were able to seat "9" jurors. (We're going to seat 12 + 4 alternates, so we have 7 more to go.) All in all, not a bad day.

FYI, if you're interested in the current breakdow of the 9 jurors, here is is:

Black female: 1
White male: 5
White female: 2
East Indian female: 1

Well, there you have it. I'll write more tomorrow.