The Jury

Well, four days doing my citizenship gig.  Four mornings awakened by the alarm at 6 AM.  Shower, shave, a bowl of cereal and out the door.  That deja vu feeling...now why does this seem so distastefully familiar?  Oh!  That's right!  I did it for thirty fucking years.  It's called work.

Be that as it may, jury duty was really not that unpleasant.  The matter was a felony theft case out of Yakutat.  The bookkeeper for the village Native corporation was accused of stealing cash as well as covering it up by altering the books.  Not exactly the crime of the century.  Still, I have always found jury duty to be fairly stressful.  Unlike when sitting through many of the interminable meetings that characterized my work day while in state service - you actually need to pay attention when you are in the jury box.

Monday was jury selection day and by about 2 PM thirteen jurors, including an alternate, had been selected.  Said thirteen NOT including yours truly.  At that time Judge Pallenberg explained the oath he was about to administer to the lucky thirteen and asked if any of them had any qualms about taking the oath.  One gentleman raised his hand to suggest that he wasn't sure that he could convict the defendant insofar as he had just spent the last fifteen minutes or so chatting-her-up as they both hacked a butt during our last break. The judge was not amused; but dismissed the prospective juror without consequence.

Back to the jury pool (which by this time was getting pretty shallow).  The next two persons who had their names drawn at random were ultimately deemed not up-to-snuff by the defense counsel.  "Will the clerk please draw another name from the box" says  the judge.  "Mister Elmer Lindstrom" says the clerk.  "Shit oh-dear" thinks Mr. Lindstrom.

I have always found jury selection  to be one of the most interesting aspects of a trial.  In this instance, both the defense counsel and prosecutor had 11 peremptory challenges.  And they weren't afraid to use them.  The defense counsel seemed most interested in giving the heave-ho to anyone who practiced or had undue familiarity with the black arts of accountancy.  And the prosecution was very interested in making certain that all jurors understood the concept of circumstantial evidence - and recognized that it was just as splendid a product as regular ol' fashioned "I saw it with my own eyes" type evidence.

My primary hope for dismissal rested with having worked with the prosecutor on several occasions when I worked for the Department of Health and Social Services.  The prosecutor asked a number of questions about our past relationship and when, at the end, he asked me if there was any reason I could not serve impartially, I was forced to confess that there was not.   Likewise, when I subtly attempted to suggest to the defense counsel that he ought to consider my many years of experience as a state budgeteer as abhorrent as the actual practice of  accountancy, I apparently failed to make my case.  I was seated as the final juror.

I will not bore you with the details of the evidence presented in court.  With one exception. We were constantly being sent back to the jury room to allow the judge and attorneys to hash-out various legal snarls, the nature of which were not obvious to the jurors.  However I suspect that the "at eases" were largely about the admissibility of the defendant's prior criminal history.  What was interesting about this case, however, is that it may have been the defense attorney, not the prosecutor, who was determined to get his clients prior criminal  history on the record insofar as this was key to the overall defense strategy.

The defense was placed at a serious disadvantage from the outset since one of the key pieces of the prosecutor's evidence was a confession to the theft signed by the defendant.  So....among other things it was suggested by the defense that the confession was the product of the defendant's fear that once her prior record was discovered she would be unfairly charged with the theft.  In other words, to avoid being charged with felony "B" - that she did not REALLY commit - she confessed to felony "B" to avoid anyone learning of felony "A" which occurred sometime in the past.  The prosecutor offered an alternative explanation for the confession.

To make a long story short, we got the case for consideration around 3 PM on Wednesday and delivered our verdict around 10 AM the following morning.  Guilty on both counts.  It was my impression that all the jurors were very comfortable with the verdict.  Unlike previous juries I have served on there was little collateral damage in this case...at least nobody dead or seriously wounded.

In other news, I just got off the phone with Amanda who is positively giddy at the prospect of employment at Mt. Edgecumbe high school this next fall.  She has a telephonic job interview next week and is cautiously optimistic after speaking to the superintendent a couple of days ago.  Since, I appear to be stuck in Juneau for an indeterminate period of time, I would be mighty happy to have her in Sitka.  Stay tuned!

I chatted with Leah a couple of times last week and she, too, seems to be in pretty good spirits.  She has moved into a house owned by her best girlfriend and it sounds quite pleasant.  The crib comes with not only a good friend but also a nice yard, deck with BBQ facilities and even a dog.  Wish I could pay her a visit....sigh...

Well, gotta hustle.  It was bath day for dad today and I'm about ready to take some sweet potatoes out of the oven to complete a sweet potato and carrot puree for Aunt Emilies birthday supper tonight.  And I have to collect auntie at 3 PM to haul her and her kitty cat to the vet.

Have a good weekend everybody....