Deliberation (Part 2)
So now that we had everyone agreeing that Mr. Outlaw was there the night of shooting, I felt a little more relaxed because we all had agreed that he was guilty of something (1st degree, 2nd degree or manslaughter). My gut feeling was that he was guilty and it was good to know that 11 other people felt the same way.
So now we moved onto the whether Outlaw had a gun or not. No gun was ever found. People started reading their notes about who said what about what, about the gun. This got confusing since we all different notes and it was hard to keep track whether something was said in deposition or on the witness stands.
Another question to the judge.
#4 can we have a copy of JT and Outlaw’s cousin transcripts ?
I gave these two questions to the bailiff to give to the judge. Phone records and Transcripts.
(Now I remember the phone records was asked in the first round of questions and the judge said they were not in evidence.)
A few moments later, we were all called into the court to hear the judges answer to the transcript request. The judge said the transcript could NOT be ready until Friday. But that we could have the testimony read back to us and that might take 1 or 2 hours. He instructed us to go back and see if we could decide without having the testimony read back.
I was pretty pissed off at this.
1. In this day and age, how can transcripts not be ready. The court reporter had at least a day to transcribe them. All we heard this morning was closing arguments.
2. The judge should have had the transcripts read without asking us to go back and decide whether we really wanted to hear them. It seem like everyone was in a rush to get this trial done in 4 days. No one wanted to come back Friday.
3. How were we going to convict a man to life in jail without the benefit of reviewing the transcripts ?
So back to the jury room we went.
So after looking at our notes, we all agreed he had a gun according to his cousin, JT (the driver) and the Rimerez brothers who got rid of the gun.
It did NOT matter whether it was his gun or the “mexican’s” gun that actually shot Jerry Smith. According to the Judge and lawyers, the law states that if you are present at the crime, you are just as guilty. It is called “principal” (One who commits or is an accomplice to a crime).
Now we turned to the second charge of robbery. Usually 1st degree murder requires premeditation. There is also something called Felony 1st degree. This states if you are committing a crime like robbery and someone is killed, they it is 1st degree.
This is where the young man from the military came in very handy. He sat the entire time in the corner of the room by the window reading his book, but for deliberation, he decided to sit next to ME. I asked him for help in reading the judge’s instructions and the definitions of the different charges etc. He was very good. Very forceful and direct. He was good at reading something and then explaining it. (I could tell he was in military intelligence. He probably has to explain to higher ups what the intelligence they were receiving meant.) And I could offset his loud voice with my calm demeanor.
The young ladies said that there was no evidence that anything was rob. And the State did not prove that they went to there to rob anyone. She had 5 people convinced. I added that I could go either way on the robbery charges.
Again the transcripts would have helped here, because we had conflicting notes about someone saying we are going to rob him.
We took another 10 min break because it got a little heated about where robbery occurred or not.
After the break, I decided to take a vote. Maybe we were all in agreement and there was no need to argue further.
We voted for 1st degree felony murder. The count was 7 to 5. I voted for 1st degree even though I was not too sure about the robbery. I knew they were trying to rob Jerry Smith, but the State had not really proved it. And anyways I wanted 2nd degree murder for the kid.
So I said ok lets discuss a little further and see if the we can convince the five about 1st degree or the 5 can convince us.
After a few more minutes of discussion, we voted again and again it was 7 to 5.
Then I said, well then we need to look at second degree murder. We voted on that and it was 11 for second degree and 1 NO !! this jurist wanted 1st degree murder. A heated discussion broke out and several people tried to explain to the jurist that we were deadlocked on 1st degree and we needed to vote for 2nd degree. So I called for a 10 min break to let things cool off.
After the break I told the group that I wanted to give each person a chance to talk. So we went one by one around the table allowing each person to have their say. Of course I started with the 5 at the end of the table who could NOT vote for robbery. One after another they expressed their doubt about whether the State proved robbery or not. Several said they knew in their gut that the boys went there to rob, but it was just not proven. After the fifth person spoke, the one remaining jury said ok, ok, I will vote for 2nd degree murder. So I quickly took another vote and got 12 for second degree murder.
Then we voted for the second count of robbery and we got 12 for no robbery.
Now it came time to fill out the paper work. Again the military guy was a pick help. The last little tough road was we had to put down whether we felt Outlaw used the gun to kill Jerry Smith OR discharged a gun OR possessed a gun OR had no gun. We voted for possessed a gun.
I signed the document and we buzzed the bailiff that we had a decision.
Monday, July 23, 2012
Monday, July 16, 2012
Deliberation (Part 1)
Deliberation
As soon as the trial had begun, it was over. It was now in our hand. The 12 jurist.
The judge had ordered lunch for us, so we would not be distracted going out for lunch. He also read us our instructions which were very confusing. Typical lawyer talk.
We walked into the jury room where we had lived for the past 4 days, and were told to wait for the evidence of the trial and written instructions from the judge. We should elect a foreman.
The co-teacher at the head of the table nominated me and several people agreed. I nominated her. I also asked if anyone else wanted to be foreman. No one raised their hand. So we voted and I was elected by all 12.
I let them talk for about 30 mins. Several people had something to say. They had been holding back for 4 days and they needed to get it off their chest.
And then I stepped in as foreman. I said we need to go in logical order.
First do we all agree that Jerry Smith is dead ? YES.
Second we all agree he died from the gun shot wound to the neck ? YES.
(so far so good, everyone was agreeing and we were moving along)
Ok next, we have decide if Mr. Outlaw was there or not…and all hell broke loose.
There is no evidence he was there. No gun, no finger prints, no DNA. One shouted.
Of course he was there….everyone says he was there. Even his own cousin.
Then lunch arrived. We passed out the sandwiches and sodas and everyone calmed down.
I had 2 questions for the judge.
1. Where was the “mexican” ? in jail, not found ?
2. Could we look at the deposition of Outlaw’s cousin ?
I gave them to the bailiff, who gave it to the judge. Only the foreman can ask the judge questions. And I did not know this, but the judge has to call the court to order and read our question to the court before he can answer.
He answered that he could not answer the question about the Mexican. We have to deliberate on the evidence and testimony given in court. And no, that the deposition is NOT part of the evidence. (I asked the Bailiff later what about the Mexican. He said the Mexican was never founded.)
After lunch, I told the jurist that we had to decide who to believe the 4 witnesses or Mr. Outlaw. A few people talked and it seem like we were all in agreement that we believed the 4 witnesses.
A discussion broke out about the gun, and I tried to quiet that down until we had all agree that Mr. Outlaw was there. Also a discussion broke out about the cell phone.
Several said if the cell phone had not been there, then they could not convict.
The question came up about the phone records. Why were they NOT presented at trial ? If the defense had shown that there were no phone calls made after 12 noon when Mr. Outlaw claimed he noticed his cell phone missing, then they could not convict.
So I started another round of questions for the judge.
3. Can we get the phone records for the cell phone ?
So we started discussing the cell phone. We all agreed that that was Mr. Outlaw’s cell phone ? YES. We all agree that Mr. Outlaw’s fingerprints were found on the cell phone ? YES.
But why did they not test TJ (the driver) for DNA ? he could have planted the cell phone.
How easy is it for kids to lose their cell phones ? or someone borrow it. Did Outlaw go 12 hours on a Sat night without calling anyone on a cell phone. He claimed he called his girlfriend at work on his grandmother’s house phone. Where are the phone records for that ? If someone had borrowed Outlaw’s phone, wouldn’t they had used it. Where are JT’s (the driver) phone records ? so many questions….so little investigative work. The police and the defense attorney were sloppy here.
I called for a 10 min break when several people got a little too excited about not looking for more fingerprints on the cell phone and not having phone records. We were about to convict a kid because his attorney did not do his job.
The police had this cell phone for 10 days before anyone even bother to check out whose cell phone it was. What were the numbers that were called that night before the shooting ? I think the phone guy said they kept records for 45 days of all calls made or coming in. And texts are saved for 60 days or maybe the other way around (I do not have our notes from the trial, there were all confiscated at the end of the trial and destroyed).
After the break, I asked again. With the evidence we have in front of us, can we all say he was there ? I could not believe it, everyone said YES. That was a major accomplishment.
As soon as the trial had begun, it was over. It was now in our hand. The 12 jurist.
The judge had ordered lunch for us, so we would not be distracted going out for lunch. He also read us our instructions which were very confusing. Typical lawyer talk.
We walked into the jury room where we had lived for the past 4 days, and were told to wait for the evidence of the trial and written instructions from the judge. We should elect a foreman.
The co-teacher at the head of the table nominated me and several people agreed. I nominated her. I also asked if anyone else wanted to be foreman. No one raised their hand. So we voted and I was elected by all 12.
I let them talk for about 30 mins. Several people had something to say. They had been holding back for 4 days and they needed to get it off their chest.
And then I stepped in as foreman. I said we need to go in logical order.
First do we all agree that Jerry Smith is dead ? YES.
Second we all agree he died from the gun shot wound to the neck ? YES.
(so far so good, everyone was agreeing and we were moving along)
Ok next, we have decide if Mr. Outlaw was there or not…and all hell broke loose.
There is no evidence he was there. No gun, no finger prints, no DNA. One shouted.
Of course he was there….everyone says he was there. Even his own cousin.
Then lunch arrived. We passed out the sandwiches and sodas and everyone calmed down.
I had 2 questions for the judge.
1. Where was the “mexican” ? in jail, not found ?
2. Could we look at the deposition of Outlaw’s cousin ?
I gave them to the bailiff, who gave it to the judge. Only the foreman can ask the judge questions. And I did not know this, but the judge has to call the court to order and read our question to the court before he can answer.
He answered that he could not answer the question about the Mexican. We have to deliberate on the evidence and testimony given in court. And no, that the deposition is NOT part of the evidence. (I asked the Bailiff later what about the Mexican. He said the Mexican was never founded.)
After lunch, I told the jurist that we had to decide who to believe the 4 witnesses or Mr. Outlaw. A few people talked and it seem like we were all in agreement that we believed the 4 witnesses.
A discussion broke out about the gun, and I tried to quiet that down until we had all agree that Mr. Outlaw was there. Also a discussion broke out about the cell phone.
Several said if the cell phone had not been there, then they could not convict.
The question came up about the phone records. Why were they NOT presented at trial ? If the defense had shown that there were no phone calls made after 12 noon when Mr. Outlaw claimed he noticed his cell phone missing, then they could not convict.
So I started another round of questions for the judge.
3. Can we get the phone records for the cell phone ?
So we started discussing the cell phone. We all agreed that that was Mr. Outlaw’s cell phone ? YES. We all agree that Mr. Outlaw’s fingerprints were found on the cell phone ? YES.
But why did they not test TJ (the driver) for DNA ? he could have planted the cell phone.
How easy is it for kids to lose their cell phones ? or someone borrow it. Did Outlaw go 12 hours on a Sat night without calling anyone on a cell phone. He claimed he called his girlfriend at work on his grandmother’s house phone. Where are the phone records for that ? If someone had borrowed Outlaw’s phone, wouldn’t they had used it. Where are JT’s (the driver) phone records ? so many questions….so little investigative work. The police and the defense attorney were sloppy here.
I called for a 10 min break when several people got a little too excited about not looking for more fingerprints on the cell phone and not having phone records. We were about to convict a kid because his attorney did not do his job.
The police had this cell phone for 10 days before anyone even bother to check out whose cell phone it was. What were the numbers that were called that night before the shooting ? I think the phone guy said they kept records for 45 days of all calls made or coming in. And texts are saved for 60 days or maybe the other way around (I do not have our notes from the trial, there were all confiscated at the end of the trial and destroyed).
After the break, I asked again. With the evidence we have in front of us, can we all say he was there ? I could not believe it, everyone said YES. That was a major accomplishment.
Thursday, July 12, 2012
Day 4 - Deliberations and Judgment
Day 4 Closing arguments and Deliberations
So after another restless night, we pile into the jury room at 9 am. I can tell by looking around the room that not too many of us got much good sleep last nite. It is very quiet since everyone wants to talk about the trial, but we are not allowed to yet.
At about 9:30 am we are called into the court for closing arguments.
The State is first and Mr. Moody goes step by step through the evidence and the facts of the case. He also restates the testimony of key witnesses. It was rather short maybe 30 mins.
The Defense is second and Mr. Hill repeats “Lack of Evidence” about 10 or 12 times during his remarks. There is no gun. There is no truck. There are no fingerprints. There is no DNA. The reason is because Mr. Outlaw was NOT there the night of the crime. And the witnesses are all covering up for their own involvement.
Why didn’t the State arrest JT who drove the truck ? Why didn’t the State test the “spit” for the DNA of JT or others involved in the crime ? There are more questions than answer.
Reasonable Doubt. Lack of Evidence. Shabby detective work.
The main piece in the case is the cell phone and he once again explains how easy it is to lose a cell phone. We have ALL done it. It slips out of our pockets. We loan it to a friend. We lay it down and someone else grabs it. Did the witnesses plant it at the scene ? Are they framing Outlaw to cover their own tracks.
Look at the witnesses testimonies. How many times did they misspeak and had to retell their stories ? How many times did they say, oh I got that wrong at the deposition and now it is right ?
How many times did they contradict each other ?
Reasonable Doubt. Lack of Evidence.
Then the State came back.
It comes down to who do you believe. There are four witnesses who say Outlaw did it and bragged about it. They say that Outlaw has a gun that they needed to get rid of. His own cousin who Outlaws says he loves and loves him back, testify that Mr. Outlaw came running to him that morning after the killing, that he had a gun and that he was sweaty and pacing back and forth and you asked “did you kill someone ?”. The cousin who recommended that Mr. Outlaw flee and go to Panama City and get rid of the gun. IT was the cousin who called the police and said he knew who had killed and murdered Jerry Smith. Mr. Outlaw.
It is JT who puts Mr. Outlaw at the crime scene that night and says Mr. Outlaw has a gun. It is Mr, Outlaw’s phone that is left at crime scene. The cell phone having Mr. Oulaw’s finger prints.
The other witnesses testified how Mr. Outlaw asked them to rid of the gun. They testified that Mr. Outlaw who bragged about killing Jerry Smith.
Why would these four witnesses conspire to frame Mr. Outlaw ? Why would the cousin who loves him, frame his best friend ?
The only logical conclusion is that Mr. Outlaw shot and killed Jerry Smith and he lied on the stand. You should find him kill of 1st degree murder.
Then all of a sudden. The trial was over. The judge said they have bought lunch for us and we are to start to deliberate as soon as he finishes putting together his instructions for us.
So after another restless night, we pile into the jury room at 9 am. I can tell by looking around the room that not too many of us got much good sleep last nite. It is very quiet since everyone wants to talk about the trial, but we are not allowed to yet.
At about 9:30 am we are called into the court for closing arguments.
The State is first and Mr. Moody goes step by step through the evidence and the facts of the case. He also restates the testimony of key witnesses. It was rather short maybe 30 mins.
The Defense is second and Mr. Hill repeats “Lack of Evidence” about 10 or 12 times during his remarks. There is no gun. There is no truck. There are no fingerprints. There is no DNA. The reason is because Mr. Outlaw was NOT there the night of the crime. And the witnesses are all covering up for their own involvement.
Why didn’t the State arrest JT who drove the truck ? Why didn’t the State test the “spit” for the DNA of JT or others involved in the crime ? There are more questions than answer.
Reasonable Doubt. Lack of Evidence. Shabby detective work.
The main piece in the case is the cell phone and he once again explains how easy it is to lose a cell phone. We have ALL done it. It slips out of our pockets. We loan it to a friend. We lay it down and someone else grabs it. Did the witnesses plant it at the scene ? Are they framing Outlaw to cover their own tracks.
Look at the witnesses testimonies. How many times did they misspeak and had to retell their stories ? How many times did they say, oh I got that wrong at the deposition and now it is right ?
How many times did they contradict each other ?
Reasonable Doubt. Lack of Evidence.
Then the State came back.
It comes down to who do you believe. There are four witnesses who say Outlaw did it and bragged about it. They say that Outlaw has a gun that they needed to get rid of. His own cousin who Outlaws says he loves and loves him back, testify that Mr. Outlaw came running to him that morning after the killing, that he had a gun and that he was sweaty and pacing back and forth and you asked “did you kill someone ?”. The cousin who recommended that Mr. Outlaw flee and go to Panama City and get rid of the gun. IT was the cousin who called the police and said he knew who had killed and murdered Jerry Smith. Mr. Outlaw.
It is JT who puts Mr. Outlaw at the crime scene that night and says Mr. Outlaw has a gun. It is Mr, Outlaw’s phone that is left at crime scene. The cell phone having Mr. Oulaw’s finger prints.
The other witnesses testified how Mr. Outlaw asked them to rid of the gun. They testified that Mr. Outlaw who bragged about killing Jerry Smith.
Why would these four witnesses conspire to frame Mr. Outlaw ? Why would the cousin who loves him, frame his best friend ?
The only logical conclusion is that Mr. Outlaw shot and killed Jerry Smith and he lied on the stand. You should find him kill of 1st degree murder.
Then all of a sudden. The trial was over. The judge said they have bought lunch for us and we are to start to deliberate as soon as he finishes putting together his instructions for us.
Monday, July 2, 2012
Day 3 - Defendant Testifies
Day 3 Witnesses continues
Again we are asked to be there by 9 am, but the actual trial does not start until 10 or 10:30. This gives the jurist time to get to know each other. Most are reading some book, some are on their laptops, others are checking their emails or making phone calls to work. The rest are chit chatting about life and I am teaching my new friend how to play Jodda (the 5 letter word game). The two older German ladies gang up on me and giving me a hard word Klutz !!
I also find out that my co-teacher has an Italian/Cuban husband and they plan to visit Cuba soon.
We go back to the courtroom and the cousin of Outlaw is still on the witness stand, but now he is dressed a little more appropriate, he seems more cooperative and he has gotten rid of his smirk. We all think he has been read the riot act. He still denies everything that he said in his deposition of the previous summer. And the prosecution hammers him hard. But by cross-examining him about his deposition, we (the jury) get to hear all that he said back in July of 2010.
He walks out of the courtroom without making eye contact with his cousin the defendant.
It is the cousin who in the deposition says that Outlaw came running to him that night (or early morning) all sweaty and nervous. And the cousin asks the defendant, do you think you kill someone. Also the cousin suggests that Outlaw get rid of the gun and go hide away in Panama City.
During deliberation we asked the judge if we could look at the deposition. He said NO !! It was not evidence.
So that was the case between JT (the driver) and the cousin, we knew that Outlaw was guilty.
We broke for lunch. This day I ate lunch with the black military older man. He was very nice and was born in South Carolina. He knew that everyone in those neighborhoods has a gun. We talked about the lack of blacks on the jury. We also talked about Cuba. I gave the story about Castro, he listen politely.
Then came the cell phone witness who testified that the cell phone found at the scene of the crime was registered to Outlaw. Again we were NOT giving any phone records (shame on the defense lawyer). Several jury members said if we had had the phone records showing that Outlaw made his LAST phone call at noon when he said “he lost his phone”, then there would have been a hung jury.
The DNA person testified that the cell phone did indeed have a fingerprint on it and it belonged to Outlaw. She also testified that the spent shell and unspent shells found at the crime scene did NOT have any fingerprints or DNA on it. The projectile retrieved across the street also did not have any DNA on it (no blood).
There was also a Spit found at the scene next to the cell phone, but the DNA did NOT match Outlaw nor the victim Jerry Smith. But no DNA was collected from JT and the mysterious “Mexican” was never found.
The Lead detective also testified. He did some shabby work, but this is a small town with a small budget (it reminded me of the movie in the Heat of the Night, where the local sheriff has to ask Sidney Poitier to help with a murder case in his town).
We never heard WHEN outlaw was arrested. We never heard why HE was arrested and not JT (the driver). We never heard if Outlaw gave a statement when he was arrested. We never heard why the truck was never found. And it was NOT too clear how the name Outlaw ever came up in the investigation. (I hope someday to go talk to this detective to find out the truth or at least some details since we never heard them in court). Unfortunately this shabby work reminds me of the work the police did on my house the two times it was broken into. No communication, no results….not even a sorry we did not find anything.
The way I heard it, for 10 days NO ONE was smart enough to open up the cell phone and see who it belong to. Nor to trace all the numbers listed in the cell phone. The police assumed it belong to Jerry Smith the victim because it was next to his car keys on the road.
Without the cell phone, this would have been a hung jury.
The prosecution rested and the judge gave us 15 minute break which turned into an hour.
Then we were surprised with the defense put Outlaw on the witness stand. Oh NO, NO, NO !!
I could hear every defense attorney across the country screaming. You got to be kidding.
At this point in the trial I was 50/50 on whether there was enough evidence to convict Outlaw of this crime. No gun, no truck, no finger prints, no DNA….only a cell phone that ANYONE could have had or borrowed during the day…or planted !!
But once Outlaw got on the stand he was cooked. He told his story which was very unbelievable. About losing his cell phone and being in bed at his grandmother’s house when the shooting occur. (but no grandmother testified to that)
The prosecution when to town and got Outlaw backtracking on some of his statements. He changed his story a few times.
But it all came down to the cousin. Was there any reason your cousin testified against you ? Does your cousin love you ? Do you love your cousin ?
Are you still friends with JT (the person who drive the truck and testified you were there and had a gun) ? And the Rimerez brothers who you gave the gun to to get rid of it. And you hung out with the day after the shooting.
Why are all these 4 friends of yours testifying against you ?
It was over, Outlaw was doomed.
And then the defense RESTED !!! no witnesses (like the grandmother or girlfriend of Outlaw), no evidence (like the phone records), nothing….except to make the biggest mistake in a criminal case…putting the defendant on the stand.
If Outlaw does not testify, we have a hung jury. And he goes free until the next trial.
No gun, no truck, no finger prints, no DNA and no Mexican. Like the Defense said in his opening statements LACK OF EVIDENCE and plenty of REASONABLE DOUBT.
The judge let us go for the night. To think it over. We were all stunt as we walk out of the court house.
Again we are asked to be there by 9 am, but the actual trial does not start until 10 or 10:30. This gives the jurist time to get to know each other. Most are reading some book, some are on their laptops, others are checking their emails or making phone calls to work. The rest are chit chatting about life and I am teaching my new friend how to play Jodda (the 5 letter word game). The two older German ladies gang up on me and giving me a hard word Klutz !!
I also find out that my co-teacher has an Italian/Cuban husband and they plan to visit Cuba soon.
We go back to the courtroom and the cousin of Outlaw is still on the witness stand, but now he is dressed a little more appropriate, he seems more cooperative and he has gotten rid of his smirk. We all think he has been read the riot act. He still denies everything that he said in his deposition of the previous summer. And the prosecution hammers him hard. But by cross-examining him about his deposition, we (the jury) get to hear all that he said back in July of 2010.
He walks out of the courtroom without making eye contact with his cousin the defendant.
It is the cousin who in the deposition says that Outlaw came running to him that night (or early morning) all sweaty and nervous. And the cousin asks the defendant, do you think you kill someone. Also the cousin suggests that Outlaw get rid of the gun and go hide away in Panama City.
During deliberation we asked the judge if we could look at the deposition. He said NO !! It was not evidence.
So that was the case between JT (the driver) and the cousin, we knew that Outlaw was guilty.
We broke for lunch. This day I ate lunch with the black military older man. He was very nice and was born in South Carolina. He knew that everyone in those neighborhoods has a gun. We talked about the lack of blacks on the jury. We also talked about Cuba. I gave the story about Castro, he listen politely.
Then came the cell phone witness who testified that the cell phone found at the scene of the crime was registered to Outlaw. Again we were NOT giving any phone records (shame on the defense lawyer). Several jury members said if we had had the phone records showing that Outlaw made his LAST phone call at noon when he said “he lost his phone”, then there would have been a hung jury.
The DNA person testified that the cell phone did indeed have a fingerprint on it and it belonged to Outlaw. She also testified that the spent shell and unspent shells found at the crime scene did NOT have any fingerprints or DNA on it. The projectile retrieved across the street also did not have any DNA on it (no blood).
There was also a Spit found at the scene next to the cell phone, but the DNA did NOT match Outlaw nor the victim Jerry Smith. But no DNA was collected from JT and the mysterious “Mexican” was never found.
The Lead detective also testified. He did some shabby work, but this is a small town with a small budget (it reminded me of the movie in the Heat of the Night, where the local sheriff has to ask Sidney Poitier to help with a murder case in his town).
We never heard WHEN outlaw was arrested. We never heard why HE was arrested and not JT (the driver). We never heard if Outlaw gave a statement when he was arrested. We never heard why the truck was never found. And it was NOT too clear how the name Outlaw ever came up in the investigation. (I hope someday to go talk to this detective to find out the truth or at least some details since we never heard them in court). Unfortunately this shabby work reminds me of the work the police did on my house the two times it was broken into. No communication, no results….not even a sorry we did not find anything.
The way I heard it, for 10 days NO ONE was smart enough to open up the cell phone and see who it belong to. Nor to trace all the numbers listed in the cell phone. The police assumed it belong to Jerry Smith the victim because it was next to his car keys on the road.
Without the cell phone, this would have been a hung jury.
The prosecution rested and the judge gave us 15 minute break which turned into an hour.
Then we were surprised with the defense put Outlaw on the witness stand. Oh NO, NO, NO !!
I could hear every defense attorney across the country screaming. You got to be kidding.
At this point in the trial I was 50/50 on whether there was enough evidence to convict Outlaw of this crime. No gun, no truck, no finger prints, no DNA….only a cell phone that ANYONE could have had or borrowed during the day…or planted !!
But once Outlaw got on the stand he was cooked. He told his story which was very unbelievable. About losing his cell phone and being in bed at his grandmother’s house when the shooting occur. (but no grandmother testified to that)
The prosecution when to town and got Outlaw backtracking on some of his statements. He changed his story a few times.
But it all came down to the cousin. Was there any reason your cousin testified against you ? Does your cousin love you ? Do you love your cousin ?
Are you still friends with JT (the person who drive the truck and testified you were there and had a gun) ? And the Rimerez brothers who you gave the gun to to get rid of it. And you hung out with the day after the shooting.
Why are all these 4 friends of yours testifying against you ?
It was over, Outlaw was doomed.
And then the defense RESTED !!! no witnesses (like the grandmother or girlfriend of Outlaw), no evidence (like the phone records), nothing….except to make the biggest mistake in a criminal case…putting the defendant on the stand.
If Outlaw does not testify, we have a hung jury. And he goes free until the next trial.
No gun, no truck, no finger prints, no DNA and no Mexican. Like the Defense said in his opening statements LACK OF EVIDENCE and plenty of REASONABLE DOUBT.
The judge let us go for the night. To think it over. We were all stunt as we walk out of the court house.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Day 2 - First Set of Witnesses
Day 2 Tues Sept 13
1st Witness
After opening remarks and then lunch, we had our first witness. He was Jerry Smith’s brother. Looked exactly like his brother who was dead. He testified that he was in bed asleep at 12:56 am on Dec. 20, 2009 Sunday (actually Sat night into the early morning Sunday). He was so sad as he retold, hearing the shot that woke him out of bed. And hearing his mother scream downstairs as his brother came through the door with blood literally pouring out of both sides of his neck. He tried to put a towel or sheet or shirt around his brother’s neck and the last words were, “they shot me”. The last time he saw his brother alive was earlier that night when his brother asked to borrow his ID so he could get some smokes.
Witness #2 was the store clerk who showed us the store video at the local Circle K where Jerry Smith bought those smokes at 12:48 that night. Eerie, very eerie. Alive one minute, dead the next. It can happen so quickly.
Very soon we heard about the life that these poor kids are living. Two brothers with their mother living in a small poor house with a white girlfriend and two little kids. The cars belong to the girlfriends and the two black boys ages 18 and 20 are NOT working. All the witnesses in this trial all tell the same story.
Witness #3 (I cannot remember the exact order, but more or less) was the first officer on the scene. I very nice man who was shocked at the amount of blood and jumped right in and tried to save the life of the boy until Fire and Rescued arrived. He had to go to the hospital for blood on hands treatment and saw Jerry Smith dead at the hospital and then returned with his dog to look for “tracks” (the smell of people sweating and running away….they claim dogs are good at this….i do not see how without some clothing of the person you are trying to track).
Witness #4 was the second officer on the scene and he tried to secure the area and start taking a “neighborhood survey”…no one saw nothing.
Witness #5 was the officer from the crime lab who labeled all the evidence on the street next to the car and the blood on the front door and inside the house. He also collected the evidence. He also took about 70 photos and we saw about 10 of them. These photos would be used throughout the entire trial.
Witness #6 was the autopsy doctor. She testified about the cause of death and we again saw some photos of Jerry Smith dead with bullet wounds on each side of his neck. She testified that the blood stains on the walls by the front door were consistent with this type of wound. She also testified that it was a large caliber bullet.
Then we had 4 witnesses. The Rimerez brothers (Mexican) who were told by Outlaw (the black defendant) that he killed someone. These two characters looked very shaky to say the least. They also visited the crime scene on Sunday with the driver of the get-a-way truck JT (Jorge Torres). Next came JT (Jorge Torres) the driver of the get-a-way truck. For some reason he was NOT charged with anything.
Since he was there when the shooting happen, he testified that Outlaw had the gun and that there was a third person with them name Daddy Mike “the mexican” who was never founded. It was JT’s testimony that we believed and that convinced us that Outlaw was guilty. It was also JT who testified that Outlaw gave him the gun to get rid of. JT gave to gun to the Rimerez brothers who gave the gun to someone else. The gun was NEVER found.
Finally we got Outlaw’s cousin. This was the worse looking of the bunch. He looked very rough and was very cocky on the witness stand. He denied everything he told the cops. He denied everything he gave in the deposition during the summer months. The judge excused the jury for the day. And court continued. It was our feeling that the judge reminded Outlaw’s cousin that he was under oath and that he was under oath when he gave his deposition….and that he was perjuring himself.
1st Witness
After opening remarks and then lunch, we had our first witness. He was Jerry Smith’s brother. Looked exactly like his brother who was dead. He testified that he was in bed asleep at 12:56 am on Dec. 20, 2009 Sunday (actually Sat night into the early morning Sunday). He was so sad as he retold, hearing the shot that woke him out of bed. And hearing his mother scream downstairs as his brother came through the door with blood literally pouring out of both sides of his neck. He tried to put a towel or sheet or shirt around his brother’s neck and the last words were, “they shot me”. The last time he saw his brother alive was earlier that night when his brother asked to borrow his ID so he could get some smokes.
Witness #2 was the store clerk who showed us the store video at the local Circle K where Jerry Smith bought those smokes at 12:48 that night. Eerie, very eerie. Alive one minute, dead the next. It can happen so quickly.
Very soon we heard about the life that these poor kids are living. Two brothers with their mother living in a small poor house with a white girlfriend and two little kids. The cars belong to the girlfriends and the two black boys ages 18 and 20 are NOT working. All the witnesses in this trial all tell the same story.
Witness #3 (I cannot remember the exact order, but more or less) was the first officer on the scene. I very nice man who was shocked at the amount of blood and jumped right in and tried to save the life of the boy until Fire and Rescued arrived. He had to go to the hospital for blood on hands treatment and saw Jerry Smith dead at the hospital and then returned with his dog to look for “tracks” (the smell of people sweating and running away….they claim dogs are good at this….i do not see how without some clothing of the person you are trying to track).
Witness #4 was the second officer on the scene and he tried to secure the area and start taking a “neighborhood survey”…no one saw nothing.
Witness #5 was the officer from the crime lab who labeled all the evidence on the street next to the car and the blood on the front door and inside the house. He also collected the evidence. He also took about 70 photos and we saw about 10 of them. These photos would be used throughout the entire trial.
Witness #6 was the autopsy doctor. She testified about the cause of death and we again saw some photos of Jerry Smith dead with bullet wounds on each side of his neck. She testified that the blood stains on the walls by the front door were consistent with this type of wound. She also testified that it was a large caliber bullet.
Then we had 4 witnesses. The Rimerez brothers (Mexican) who were told by Outlaw (the black defendant) that he killed someone. These two characters looked very shaky to say the least. They also visited the crime scene on Sunday with the driver of the get-a-way truck JT (Jorge Torres). Next came JT (Jorge Torres) the driver of the get-a-way truck. For some reason he was NOT charged with anything.
Since he was there when the shooting happen, he testified that Outlaw had the gun and that there was a third person with them name Daddy Mike “the mexican” who was never founded. It was JT’s testimony that we believed and that convinced us that Outlaw was guilty. It was also JT who testified that Outlaw gave him the gun to get rid of. JT gave to gun to the Rimerez brothers who gave the gun to someone else. The gun was NEVER found.
Finally we got Outlaw’s cousin. This was the worse looking of the bunch. He looked very rough and was very cocky on the witness stand. He denied everything he told the cops. He denied everything he gave in the deposition during the summer months. The judge excused the jury for the day. And court continued. It was our feeling that the judge reminded Outlaw’s cousin that he was under oath and that he was under oath when he gave his deposition….and that he was perjuring himself.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
A Jury of Your Peers
A Jury of Your Peers
Sat. Sept. 17, 2011
So many thoughts I have to start somewhere. Today I get an email from Manolo Hidalgo Sr. talking about presidential candidate Perry from Texas who has overseen 250 executions while governor.
And then on TV they have big news where a man in Georgia named Davis is about to be executed for a crime he committed in 1989 (I think ?) and apparently the witnesses have changed their testimonies. Even ex-president Jimmy Carter is involved.
So what topic should I address FIRST ?
Let me start with “A Jury of your Peers”.
I have had to serve jury duty 6 times over the 30 years I have lived in Tampa. 2 times I sat in a room with about 500 people and never got called, told to go home after lunch. 2 times I was called but did not serve and 2 times I served and was foreman.
All 4 times the defendant was black (sorry all my black friends prefer the term black rather than African American….although I like to say my children are German-Cuban-Americans and believe strongly that ALL Americans have a heritage…we are truly the melting pot of the world…especially in Tampa, Florida)
The first time about 20 years ago, I was called and at the time the lobby was across the street from the court house. We had to wait outside in 95 degree weather and with humidity that made it feel way over 100 !! I was wearing a suit and many of the ladies were in nice dresses. After about 5 or 10 minutes of melting in the hot sun, the ladies walking into the A/C lobby of the courthouse…and I followed. WE saw this black man coming down the corridor in an orange jump suit with chains on hands and legs. With his goatee and afro he looked like the devil. HE was guilty of something.
The judge heard that we had seen the defendant before they were able to change him into a nice suit, so he excused us after a slap on the wrist for not waiting outside the courtroom.
The second time it was a car theft trial and about 40 of us were called and questioned before lunch. After lunch we were excused because the judge said the defendant fled during lunch. The cop told us on the way out that the defendant had stolen his lawyer’s car during lunch break. We all laughed.
The third time I was chosen out of 20 people for a civil case involving JC Penny and a black woman.
The woman was suing for 1 million dollars for possible neck injury during scuffle with employee. I was chosen as the foreman and we sided with JC Penny. The jury of 6 only had one young black girl that did not say much. We deliberated for only an hour, but the group was ready to vote in the first 5 mins. The lawyer for the older black woman was terrible and lost the case. The lawyer for JC Penny was great !!
So now 3 years later, I was called to jury duty again. Over 1,000 people sitting around. They called 60 people for a criminal case. We first got asked questions as a group by the State. We had to say out loud if we had records. Some people admitted DUI others domestic violence. Then they asked about family members. Many said their husbands or brothers had been arrested for this or that. Then if we had been victims of crime. I mentioned that our house had been broken into 3 times…everyone laughed. The State asked me if I was satisfied with the police work. I said yes one time and no to the other two times. Almost half the group either had their houses broken into or car stolen. Some were raped, some walked up to the bench and talked to the judge privately.
At this point I was getting a little pissed because there were about 20 people there who should have been let go from the beginning. The guy next to me was a Merchant Marine and his ship was leaving Wed. They made him wait all day and answer all these questions. We all knew he was not going to be on the jury. This lady was pregnant and kept crying (they did left her go home early). Another man could not speak English. One lady said she did not understand anything the lawyers were saying. We ALL laughed.
The prosecutor also got rid of the old ladies who could not hear or would not be able to sit all day because of back or neck problems. Why not let them go RIGHT AWAY. No they sat around all day and answered a bunch of more questions. (In a year I will be talking to the State attorney Mr. Moody and ask him why they did not let people go right away and save us all some time)
The State spent some time asking if we understood what it meant to be a principle in a murder case. Apparently if you are driving the getaway car and someone else pulls the trigger, you are just as guilty (whether you believe in the law of not). Several people said they could NOT condemn a person if they did NOT pull the trigger themselves.
Thank goodness someone asked if this was a capital punishment case. They said NO !! thank goodness because I would refuse to serve on a jury (which is by the way unfair to all those defendants who are possible capital punishment cases).
Then came the defendant attorney. His first question was what newspaper do we read, what news show and what organizations do we belong to. I said Tampa Tribune, St Pete Times, NY Times, CNN and FOX and I belong to the Math Teachers of America. The lawyer made some remark about math.
I was surprised to hear that most of the people did NOT read the newspaper, I heard FOX a lot (very surprised…I guess Tampa is conservative after all) and most belong to Church groups.
Then he asked if we all agreed that the defendant was innocent. What ? yes, he is innocent (of course he meant in a legal sense BEFORE trial). HE asked us what would we think if we saw a person in the back seat of a police car, would we think the person did something. I raised my hand. He called my name…Manuel Suarez. You think if someone is sitting in the back seat of a cop car they did something. I said yes. Some other lady said, she would think the person was going for a car ride. So the defense attorney asked the group. Who agrees with MR. Suarez here (dam he used my name again…that was scary). Half the people rose their hand. Who agrees with Ms. Smith, the other half rose their hand.
I thought this alone would get me off the jury.
Then he asked if we were leaders or followers and if we like to compromise or stand our ground.
I said Leader and Compromise. With 60 people there we got all kinds of answers. Many said Follower and Stand my ground (which did not make sense to me).
I was very surprised that they did not ask us about being prejudice, since that was the first question they asked in the civil law suit case.
Then someone mentioned that they could not look at gory pictures. All hell broke loose. After a little discussion with both attorneys and the judge, they asked if anyone would have a hard time emotionally looking at blood and picture of a dead person. Half the people raised a concern. (Later on in the jury room, I asked the 12 people if anyone had raised concern about gory pictures. Not one, they all got off. That is NOT good for the defendant. He needs passionate, emotional and sensitive people on the jury.
Then they started choosing and I was the only one from the front row who got selected. DAM !! There was one guy at the end of my row who could barely speak English and they kept calling him Mr. Engineer…we all laughed every time they called him. No way his real name was Mr. Engineer.
They got 14 people before getting to the 5th and 6th row of people. The judge gave us some instructions and sent us home for the day. I was already exhausted emotionally and mentally and the trial had NOT even started.
Sat. Sept. 17, 2011
So many thoughts I have to start somewhere. Today I get an email from Manolo Hidalgo Sr. talking about presidential candidate Perry from Texas who has overseen 250 executions while governor.
And then on TV they have big news where a man in Georgia named Davis is about to be executed for a crime he committed in 1989 (I think ?) and apparently the witnesses have changed their testimonies. Even ex-president Jimmy Carter is involved.
So what topic should I address FIRST ?
Let me start with “A Jury of your Peers”.
I have had to serve jury duty 6 times over the 30 years I have lived in Tampa. 2 times I sat in a room with about 500 people and never got called, told to go home after lunch. 2 times I was called but did not serve and 2 times I served and was foreman.
All 4 times the defendant was black (sorry all my black friends prefer the term black rather than African American….although I like to say my children are German-Cuban-Americans and believe strongly that ALL Americans have a heritage…we are truly the melting pot of the world…especially in Tampa, Florida)
The first time about 20 years ago, I was called and at the time the lobby was across the street from the court house. We had to wait outside in 95 degree weather and with humidity that made it feel way over 100 !! I was wearing a suit and many of the ladies were in nice dresses. After about 5 or 10 minutes of melting in the hot sun, the ladies walking into the A/C lobby of the courthouse…and I followed. WE saw this black man coming down the corridor in an orange jump suit with chains on hands and legs. With his goatee and afro he looked like the devil. HE was guilty of something.
The judge heard that we had seen the defendant before they were able to change him into a nice suit, so he excused us after a slap on the wrist for not waiting outside the courtroom.
The second time it was a car theft trial and about 40 of us were called and questioned before lunch. After lunch we were excused because the judge said the defendant fled during lunch. The cop told us on the way out that the defendant had stolen his lawyer’s car during lunch break. We all laughed.
The third time I was chosen out of 20 people for a civil case involving JC Penny and a black woman.
The woman was suing for 1 million dollars for possible neck injury during scuffle with employee. I was chosen as the foreman and we sided with JC Penny. The jury of 6 only had one young black girl that did not say much. We deliberated for only an hour, but the group was ready to vote in the first 5 mins. The lawyer for the older black woman was terrible and lost the case. The lawyer for JC Penny was great !!
So now 3 years later, I was called to jury duty again. Over 1,000 people sitting around. They called 60 people for a criminal case. We first got asked questions as a group by the State. We had to say out loud if we had records. Some people admitted DUI others domestic violence. Then they asked about family members. Many said their husbands or brothers had been arrested for this or that. Then if we had been victims of crime. I mentioned that our house had been broken into 3 times…everyone laughed. The State asked me if I was satisfied with the police work. I said yes one time and no to the other two times. Almost half the group either had their houses broken into or car stolen. Some were raped, some walked up to the bench and talked to the judge privately.
At this point I was getting a little pissed because there were about 20 people there who should have been let go from the beginning. The guy next to me was a Merchant Marine and his ship was leaving Wed. They made him wait all day and answer all these questions. We all knew he was not going to be on the jury. This lady was pregnant and kept crying (they did left her go home early). Another man could not speak English. One lady said she did not understand anything the lawyers were saying. We ALL laughed.
The prosecutor also got rid of the old ladies who could not hear or would not be able to sit all day because of back or neck problems. Why not let them go RIGHT AWAY. No they sat around all day and answered a bunch of more questions. (In a year I will be talking to the State attorney Mr. Moody and ask him why they did not let people go right away and save us all some time)
The State spent some time asking if we understood what it meant to be a principle in a murder case. Apparently if you are driving the getaway car and someone else pulls the trigger, you are just as guilty (whether you believe in the law of not). Several people said they could NOT condemn a person if they did NOT pull the trigger themselves.
Thank goodness someone asked if this was a capital punishment case. They said NO !! thank goodness because I would refuse to serve on a jury (which is by the way unfair to all those defendants who are possible capital punishment cases).
Then came the defendant attorney. His first question was what newspaper do we read, what news show and what organizations do we belong to. I said Tampa Tribune, St Pete Times, NY Times, CNN and FOX and I belong to the Math Teachers of America. The lawyer made some remark about math.
I was surprised to hear that most of the people did NOT read the newspaper, I heard FOX a lot (very surprised…I guess Tampa is conservative after all) and most belong to Church groups.
Then he asked if we all agreed that the defendant was innocent. What ? yes, he is innocent (of course he meant in a legal sense BEFORE trial). HE asked us what would we think if we saw a person in the back seat of a police car, would we think the person did something. I raised my hand. He called my name…Manuel Suarez. You think if someone is sitting in the back seat of a cop car they did something. I said yes. Some other lady said, she would think the person was going for a car ride. So the defense attorney asked the group. Who agrees with MR. Suarez here (dam he used my name again…that was scary). Half the people rose their hand. Who agrees with Ms. Smith, the other half rose their hand.
I thought this alone would get me off the jury.
Then he asked if we were leaders or followers and if we like to compromise or stand our ground.
I said Leader and Compromise. With 60 people there we got all kinds of answers. Many said Follower and Stand my ground (which did not make sense to me).
I was very surprised that they did not ask us about being prejudice, since that was the first question they asked in the civil law suit case.
Then someone mentioned that they could not look at gory pictures. All hell broke loose. After a little discussion with both attorneys and the judge, they asked if anyone would have a hard time emotionally looking at blood and picture of a dead person. Half the people raised a concern. (Later on in the jury room, I asked the 12 people if anyone had raised concern about gory pictures. Not one, they all got off. That is NOT good for the defendant. He needs passionate, emotional and sensitive people on the jury.
Then they started choosing and I was the only one from the front row who got selected. DAM !! There was one guy at the end of my row who could barely speak English and they kept calling him Mr. Engineer…we all laughed every time they called him. No way his real name was Mr. Engineer.
They got 14 people before getting to the 5th and 6th row of people. The judge gave us some instructions and sent us home for the day. I was already exhausted emotionally and mentally and the trial had NOT even started.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)