6 Jurors versus 12 Jurors ... who will this benefit?

New Posts

Friday said:
Not to be a kill-joy but if I were the only hold-out against convicting someone, I'd be more willing to yield to the opposing opinion of 11 other people, than I would be willing to yield to the opposing opinion of only 5 others. I'm not implying that I'd been more intimidated if eleven people ganged up on me. Rather, I mean that I'd be more willing to doubt/question my own judgment if 11 people adamantly disagreed with me. If there were only 5 people who saw things the opposite of me, I'd be more inclined to shrug that off, stand firm, and try to bring them around.

Lately, I notice I'm using a lot more words to try to explain myself, but not doing a better job of it. LOL. So, to reduce all the above to one sentence: I'd be more willing to question my own judgment if 11 other people thought I was dead-wrong, than I'd be if only 5 people thought that.
Click to expand...

bolded and color by me

that's me everyday after lunch lol...anyways I agree with your whole post :)
 
Wow. I just can not believe a case like this would only have 6 jurors. I live in Texas and have served on civil and criminal juries, both of which consisted of 12 jurors. The criminal case was easy decision on guilt but punishment we bickered. Because ten of them went for max, I think the other two agreed more easily. If only 6 total jurors, I think it would have been harder to decide.
 
Wow, I now feel privileged to have sat on a Florida jury of 12. Heh.

My situation was slightly different as we were selected to serve only during the penalty phase, as the original jury's recommendation was thrown out because of an inappropriate comment made by one of the lawyers.

I thought it was a fairly seamless process, but by not having to determine guilt we merely had to reach a consensus. That's quite a bit easier.

That said, I don't think a smaller jury benefits either side. The voir dire process is the same (as far as I'm aware) and it all has to do with the six (lucky, oh so lucky) selected for this trial. It seems like such a crapshoot. But you WOULD think that it's less likely to find a KC-lovah in a pool of six than of 12, like someone else said.

So the more I think about this, the more I think it helps the prosecution. Maybe it's because I desperately want to believe that, but it only takes one to hang a jury, but you have to have a unaminous decision to convict. Easier to convince six, and whether you have a pool of six or 12, you can still have a holdout.

So yeah. How's that for stream of consciousness?
 
The way I see it is:
The defense needs only one holdout to have a hung jury. With 6 jurors, they have only 6 chances for a hold out. If there were 12, they would have 12 chances to get that one hold out. I see it like lottery tickets. If I buy 12 I have more chances of winning than if I only buy 6.
For this reason I think it benefits the state to have 6 jurors instead of 12.
 
NancyT said:
Since the defense will be looking for a moron, it would seem to me that finding 1 in 6 would be harder than finding 1 in 12. :crazy:
Click to expand...

I think they will be looking for that moron long before the 6 jurors are picked.

That's why I don't believe either side benefits.

They are all picked from the same pool. Seems to me it would be easy to whittle it down to 6 people you REALLY like.

I wonder if the jury intructions would be different though?

Here's a link for the jury instructions for FL:

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions.shtml
 
Talk about being a "killjoy."
I am "pretty sure" this is still a "capital case," and that there will be 12 jurors for the trial.

SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA


STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner
vs.
CHARLES L. GRIFFITH, Respondent.




"...state's decision not to seek the death penalty in a first-degree murder case does not automatically permit trial by a six-person jury,...

Section 913.10, Florida Statutes (1985), and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.270 state that twelve persons shall constitute a jury to try all capital cases, and six persons shall constitute a jury to try all other criminal cases.
This Court has previously held that, for the purposes of this statute and rule, a capital crime is one where death is a possible punishment. State v. Hogan, 451 So.2d 844 (Fla. 1984). See Rusaw v. State, 451 So.2d 469 (Fla. 1984); Rowe v. State, 417 So.2d 981 (Fla. 1982); Donaldson v. Sack, 265 So.2d 499 (Fla. 1972); see also Fla. R. Crim. P.


3.140(a)(1) ("Capital Crimes. An offense which may be punished by death shall be prosecuted by indictment."). In sub section 782.04(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), the legislature classified first-degree murder as a capital felony, alternatively punishable by death or by life imprisonment with no parole for twenty-five years as provided in sub section 775.082(1), Florida Statutes (1985)....


The state contends that, when it waives the death penalty in a first-degree murder case, a defendant is no longer entitled to a twelve-person jury because death is not a possible punishment. We disagree.
It is well settled that the legislature has the power to define crimes, set punishments, and prescribe the number of jurors (not less than six). The prosecutor has no such power. The prosecutor cannot, by electing not to seek the death penalty, change the classification of an offense from capital to noncapital and unilaterally determine whether a defendant is entitled to trial by a twelve-person jury...."


http://vlex.com/vid/florida-vs-charles-l-griffith-respondent-20842432:wolf:

Humble-Opinion:wolf:
 
Marple said:
I have served on a jury of 12 in an other state and also on a jury of 6 in Florida. The jury of 6 was much easier.
Click to expand...

Why was a jury of 6 easier?
 
I think that getting 6 people to totally agree is much easier than getting 12 people to agree. If we are speaking of a general case, I do not know that benefits either SA or defense. In this particular case, with the information that is already known to the public, I think you will have 6 jurors waiting for an explanation from the defense regarding the accuseds actions / inactions, and they will not get it unless KC testifies (not happening). It only takes one to hang a jury, and that would not matter if it was 1 in 6, 12, or even more. Jury selection may be the hardest part of this trial. Since there are no offers on the table, I am leaning towards SA having a solid case.

moo
 
NancyT said:
Since the defense will be looking for a moron, it would seem to me that finding 1 in 6 would be harder than finding 1 in 12. :crazy:
Click to expand...

When I first read that I thought you said "Since the defense will be looking like a moron" :floorlaugh:
 
MiraclesHappen said:
Talk about being a "killjoy."
I am "pretty sure" this is still a "capital case," and that there will be 12 jurors for the trial.

SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA


STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner
vs.
CHARLES L. GRIFFITH, Respondent.




"...state's decision not to seek the death penalty in a first-degree murder case does not automatically permit trial by a six-person jury,...

Section 913.10, Florida Statutes (1985), and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.270 state that twelve persons shall constitute a jury to try all capital cases, and six persons shall constitute a jury to try all other criminal cases.
This Court has previously held that, for the purposes of this statute and rule, a capital crime is one where death is a possible punishment. State v. Hogan, 451 So.2d 844 (Fla. 1984). See Rusaw v. State, 451 So.2d 469 (Fla. 1984); Rowe v. State, 417 So.2d 981 (Fla. 1982); Donaldson v. Sack, 265 So.2d 499 (Fla. 1972); see also Fla. R. Crim. P.


3.140(a)(1) ("Capital Crimes. An offense which may be punished by death shall be prosecuted by indictment."). In sub section 782.04(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), the legislature classified first-degree murder as a capital felony, alternatively punishable by death or by life imprisonment with no parole for twenty-five years as provided in sub section 775.082(1), Florida Statutes (1985)....


The state contends that, when it waives the death penalty in a first-degree murder case, a defendant is no longer entitled to a twelve-person jury because death is not a possible punishment. We disagree.
It is well settled that the legislature has the power to define crimes, set punishments, and prescribe the number of jurors (not less than six). The prosecutor has no such power. The prosecutor cannot, by electing not to seek the death penalty, change the classification of an offense from capital to noncapital and unilaterally determine whether a defendant is entitled to trial by a twelve-person jury...."


http://vlex.com/vid/florida-vs-charles-l-griffith-respondent-20842432:wolf:

Humble-Opinion:wolf:
Click to expand...

Well, that settles it. This is a 12 person jury unless the charges are modified. Thank you, Miracles! :woohoo:
 
Dear Prudence said:
Wow. I just can not believe a case like this would only have 6 jurors. I live in Texas and have served on civil and criminal juries, both of which consisted of 12 jurors. The criminal case was easy decision on guilt but punishment we bickered. Because ten of them went for max, I think the other two agreed more easily. If only 6 total jurors, I think it would have been harder to decide.
Click to expand...

The only case I ever followed that had a jury of 6 was Warren Jeffs, the polygamist head of the Fundamentalist Mormon church. I believe that trial was held in Utah, but then he was also to be tried in Nevada on similar charges (I've not kept up with the case, so have no clue where it stands).
 
MiraclesHappen said:
Talk about being a "killjoy."
I am "pretty sure" this is still a "capital case," and that there will be 12 jurors for the trial.

SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA


STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner
vs.
CHARLES L. GRIFFITH, Respondent.




"...state's decision not to seek the death penalty in a first-degree murder case does not automatically permit trial by a six-person jury,...

Section 913.10, Florida Statutes (1985), and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.270 state that twelve persons shall constitute a jury to try all capital cases, and six persons shall constitute a jury to try all other criminal cases.
This Court has previously held that, for the purposes of this statute and rule, a capital crime is one where death is a possible punishment. State v. Hogan, 451 So.2d 844 (Fla. 1984). See Rusaw v. State, 451 So.2d 469 (Fla. 1984); Rowe v. State, 417 So.2d 981 (Fla. 1982); Donaldson v. Sack, 265 So.2d 499 (Fla. 1972); see also Fla. R. Crim. P.


3.140(a)(1) ("Capital Crimes. An offense which may be punished by death shall be prosecuted by indictment."). In sub section 782.04(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), the legislature classified first-degree murder as a capital felony, alternatively punishable by death or by life imprisonment with no parole for twenty-five years as provided in sub section 775.082(1), Florida Statutes (1985)....


The state contends that, when it waives the death penalty in a first-degree murder case, a defendant is no longer entitled to a twelve-person jury because death is not a possible punishment. We disagree.
It is well settled that the legislature has the power to define crimes, set punishments, and prescribe the number of jurors (not less than six). The prosecutor has no such power. The prosecutor cannot, by electing not to seek the death penalty, change the classification of an offense from capital to noncapital and unilaterally determine whether a defendant is entitled to trial by a twelve-person jury...."


http://vlex.com/vid/florida-vs-charles-l-griffith-respondent-20842432:wolf:

Humble-Opinion:wolf:
Click to expand...

THANKS! I knew it was not 6 but have too many other things to do than look it up. :)

:blowkiss:
 
Theonly1 said:
THANKS! I knew it was not 6 but have too many other things to do than look it up. :)

:blowkiss:
Click to expand...



I know what ya mean.:blowkiss:

I could be wrong, but it just seems to make sense. Not that that fact it makes sense is a guarantee of anything in the law. :wolf:
 
Thanks Miracles, for your due diligence!! I saw a few weeks ago that another poster said that there would be 6 jurors instead of 12 and I thought NO WAY! So, I looked up the statute and the bright-line ruling of Williams v. FL ... but I totally missed the FL Supreme Court ruling. It definitely sounds like there would be cause for appeal if they went ahead with seating only 6 so, surely they will seat 12.

Thanks again!:blowkiss:
 
one_hooah_wife said:
Thanks Miracles, for your due diligence!! I saw a few weeks ago that another poster said that there would be 6 jurors instead of 12 and I thought NO WAY! So, I looked up the statute and the bright-line ruling of Williams v. FL ... but I totally missed the FL Supreme Court ruling. It definitely sounds like there would be cause for appeal if they went ahead with seating only 6 so, surely they will seat 12.

Thanks again!:blowkiss:
Click to expand...



You are welcome, OHW!!!:blowkiss:

It's still an interesting topic......you made us think.:wolf:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 207 more.
Total: 4,606 (members: 208, guests: 4,398)

Online statistics

Members online
208
Guests online
4,398
Total visitors
4,606
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,362
Messages
17,968,018
Members
228,756
Latest member
Curious.tea
Back
Top