Last week, Ed Fletcher of the Sacramento Bee wrote a truly insightful piece about his jury service on a criminal trial. Not surprisingly, the story got little attention from media outlets around the country. (Apparently, only incite-ful jury pieces need apply.) The title of the column was “I voted to send another brother to prison.”
Mr. Fletcher is a black man (as was the defendant). Mr. Fletcher is a journalist. Mr. Fletcher was leaning towards a not guilty verdict at the trial’s opening. Most importantly, Mr. Fletcher was the foreperson.
To some prosecutors (and armchair lawyers), this would be a situation that demanded an immediate plea deal. However, that decision would have been based on an opinion of Mr. Fletcher that was rooted in stereotype and personal bias. Worse, it would assume that the prosecution’s presentation would be so inept and disjointed, that it would be unable to overcome any juror predilections.
Instead, the State chose to present a compelling case and let the jurors decide. As Mr. Fletcher noted:
“The gunshot residue was big, but no piece of evidence offered the clear cut satisfaction supplied by ‘CSI,’ ‘Bones,’ ‘The Closer,’ or ‘Criminal Minds.’ In our real world case, witnesses' views were obscured by darkness, the handgun had no incriminating finger prints and the (video) footage was crap.”
He continued…
“When I entered the deliberation room, my gut told me that we were headed for a hung jury. But as we kept reviewing evidence, re-reading the jury instructions on the law and talking about our positions, more of the jurors began to reach the same conclusion: Boyce fired the gun.”
Despite the harrowing cries of incompetence from the public and blogosphere, this is the typical process that justice follows in our system. As this National Center for State Courts research indicates, hung juries are rare. They are the exception, not the rule.
After the trial, Mr. Fletcher did research on the newly convicted defendant. He discovered that the man crying like a baby in court was no angel. This put Ed Fletcher’s mind at ease:
“Today, I feel much better about our collective decision. Freed from court instructions not to do any research, I now know that Boyce's record stretches back to 1999 and includes a murder charge that was dropped in 2003, two separate plea deals on spousal abuse and a 2005 plea deal on an assault with a deadly weapon charge.”
I would argue that this is the perfect example of our system at its best. Mr. Fletcher’s eyes presumed the defendant’s innocence from the start. His conviction was based on the prosecution’s presentation of evidence of the crime, not an opinion of Mr. Fletcher that was rooted in stereotype and personal bias. Sadly, it is the exception, not the rule that most of us remember.
Blogger: Matt McCusker
