MS - Jessica Chambers, 19, Panola County, Dec 2014 #3 *MISTRIAL*

[oceanblueeyes]

This jury was brought in from another county 200 mi away. They have to find jurors who can be away from their lives for 2 weeks, sequestered in a hotel. It doesn't require no knowledge of the case, but it does require the ability to put aside any opinions and judge the case based only on the evidence presented in court.

Why didn't they get jurors from a larger town? I think larger cities may produce more jurors with a more enlightened knowledge and vocabulary needed in cases like this.

It seems even the Foreman believed if they were not unanimous for Guilt then he was to be deemed Not Guilty and that is why he wrote that on the verdict form. It is downright scary how anyone could comprehend the jury instructions that way.

It seems none of them have ever been jurors on a murder case or at least one of them would have chimed in to at least tell the Foreman they had to be unanimous one way or the other to put it on the verdict form. If none of them didn't know more than he did then it was the blind leading the blind.

I thought the Anthony jurors were bad but they cant hold a candle to this jury. At least the CA jury knew the meaning of unanimous.

In the cases where I served as a juror we weren't ever told that we had to have no knowledge about the case but what we had to swear to do is only consider the evidence entered in the trial from the witness stand to come to our decision.

I think it is a very bad requirement for any trial if they demand the selected jurors know nothing at all about any case. The only way they can do that is if they find the type that never reads or watches the news and couldn't care less about what is happening in the world or in their own community. To me those would tend to be more like the CSI type jurors wanting everything to be like an one hour fictional show.

 

[cady]

Memphis is Tennessee. Jurors had to be from MS. JMO

 

[RosalindaA]

Hear from the jury? Probably! I think they must have been after a book deal or their own reality tv show. I didn't see all the evidence but must admit though the state case did seem to heavily rely on the cell phone data. Though I thought this was well presented and credible (not many IT people are good at communicating their knowledge to non-IT people), I know that I have absolutely no basis of knowledge to judge its accuracy.

My verdict would have come from the fact that I think I know a lie (or two) when I see one and that I couldn't envisage any good reason for lying other than that of trying to cover guilt. But I know I'm also being influenced by the Louisiana case which I shouldn't really be bringing into my thoughts. But is that realistic in this day and age?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Memphis is Tennessee. Jurors had to be from MS. JMO

My bad. I am sorry. Had a mental lapse for a moment. Thank you.

Is there a larger town close by where the next jury pool could be selected?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Hear from the jury? Probably! I think they must have been after a book deal or their own reality tv show. I didn't see all the evidence but must admit though the state case did seem to heavily rely on the cell phone data. Though I thought this was well presented and credible (not many IT people are good at communicating their knowledge to non-IT people), I know that I have absolutely no basis of knowledge to judge its accuracy.

My verdict would have come from the fact that I think I know a lie (or two) when I see one and that I couldn't envisage any good reason for lying other than that of trying to cover guilt. But I know I'm also being influenced by the Louisiana case which I shouldn't really be bringing into my thoughts. But is that realistic in this day and age?

That was part of it for me too. He lied and lied and lied and lied.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Jackson, perhaps?

 

[scichick]

I don't think she was saying "Eric" - If she were unconscious when she was moved to the site and further when doused with gasoline, when she revived she would have had no idea what happened to her and may very well have been saying "car wreck" because that is what she perceived (if she was even able to process that). I don't think she was giving a name.

 

[mrsNKY]

The jury may may have misunderstood the evidence, maybe not. They are supposed to be a jury of your peers so...
But the worst thing to me was the judge looking at the jury form, then polling the jury using names all the while, he has the jury form. He should have immediately sent them back to the jury room and explained why the form was marked incorrectly. IF the jury was convinced they could not reach a unanimous verdict, he should have declared a mistrial. It is going to be hard to have that many with a not-guilty vote to swing to guilty. He polled them and that is dangerous to not allowed the standard cooling down period. I am still looking if they were given another jury instruction when they went back to deliberating. I hope not. This is a huge mess in my opinion. There are so many errors at this point, he deserves a new trial I think. Everyone should have a fair trial and this may not be. I'm not saying he's guilty, it is not my place, I wasn't there to hear all of the case, but fair trial is what our legal system is based on. Very tough position today.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[AzPistonsGirl]

My verdict would have come from the fact that I think I know a lie (or two) when I see one and that I couldn't envisage any good reason for lying other than that of trying to cover guilt.

Snipped by me - but juries must base their verdicts on facts and evidence and the logic of arguments presented, not on thinking you know a lie when you hear one. I am not faulting you or your post at all - just using it to point out that being a fair juror is difficult. There is no prep or training course, no requisite that a prospective juror be of a certain educational level, etc.

http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1378&context=facpub

Jessica is our focus here, I understand, but a professionally trained jury might have had a verdict for her family today.

 

[RosalindaA]

Just saw a shot of Jessica's family sitting there in stunned silence. A reminder of the horrific ordeal that just goes on and on for the families of murder victims, I wonder if there is any possibility that something can be worked out after the other Tellis trial so that they do not have to go through this all over again?

 

[Bravo]

I don't think she was saying "Eric" - If she were unconscious when she was moved to the site and further when doused with gasoline, when she revived she would have had no idea what happened to her and may very well have been saying "car wreck" because that is what she perceived (if she was even able to process that). I don't think she was giving a name.

:welcome:

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Jackson, perhaps?

I think there is no one scratching their head more over this than the presiding judge. I bet in all of his time on the bench he has never had anything like this happen before.

I wouldn't be surprised if he does agree to another COV when the case is retried.

 

[epiphany]

And here I remember thinking early on that the State was really breaking it down and simplifying the evidence for the jurors. I noticed it.

So many hours of video of QT's interviews. I actually recall thinking, O that's great that the investigators are questioning QT using simple terms & language, yet not talking down to him.

Even the Director of the Burn Center spoke in language and answered all questions in a manner that made his responses accessible to the jurors.

Also, I could follow more than I usually can when the Cell Data Analyst testified

 

[katydid23]

So Tellis only got 10 years on stolen credit cards, and was not charged with the death of Ming-shei?---- the girl he probably tortured and killed before taking her cards?

 

[SouthernSleuther]

Disclaimer: I live in Mississippi (nowhere near Panola County)

No words. I followed the trial through the wonderful efforts of our sleuthers posting tweets here and felt that the investigation was more thorough than many had speculated and the trial was smoothly conducted. Now this. This is the most absurd thing I've ever seen. I don't even know what to say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Snipped by me - but juries must base their verdicts on facts and evidence and the logic of arguments presented, not on thinking you know a lie when you hear one. I am not faulting you or your post at all - just using it to point out that being a fair juror is difficult. There is no prep or training course, no requisite that a prospective juror be of a certain educational level, etc.

http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1378&context=facpub

Jessica is our focus here, I understand, but a professionally trained jury might have had a verdict for her family today.

But QTs interviews were a part of this case so of course anyone here or the jury can weigh those interviews, and the lies he repeatedly told combined with the other case evidence. It was proven he lied. So the poster has ever right to include those interviews when believing he was proved guilty since it was a part of the state's case. IMO

 

[RosalindaA]

For me I think it's logical to suppose that if someone tells so many proven lies, that guilt is strongly indicated, taking into account any other evidence as well. Or I would expect his defence to give me a very good reason why the defendant lied so much. As I say I haven't watched the whole trial but if they did that I missed it. Or I would expect that the defendant should take the stand and tell me why he lied and I would certainly be open to that. But he didn't...

 

[Bravo]

So Tellis only got 10 years on stolen credit cards, and was not charged with the death of Ming-shei?---- the girl he probably tortured and killed before taking her cards?

Louisiana was waiting for this Trial then will try him on that murder

 

[ScotAng]

I've got a feeling we'll hear from the jury on this one. Maybe the foreman was a bully, know-it-all and told the rest of them, "this is the way it works" and no matter what they said he wouldn't listen so then they finally just acquiesced?

He'd need to have been really intimidating. Saying that, I did get a vibe something was going on with the foreman and at least two jurors.

The juror who first spoke out that it was not unanimous was angry. Rightly. Not sure if that was same person who made the "I did not vote him innocent" (or words to effect) comment.

The vote was 7/5 for guilt. Why didn't all who voted guilty not speak out at that time? That surprised me. I do hope we hear from at least a few of them, as we'll surely not hear them talk as a "group".

 

[katydid23]

interesting:

http://people.com/crime/jessica-chambers-suspect-quinton-tellis-pleads-guilty-to-credit-card-crime/

CRIME

Suspect in Jessica Chambers Murder Pleads Guilty to Unlawful Use of Credit Card, Will Serve at Least 10 Years in Prison


Tellis used the credit card of Meing-Chen Hsiao, 34, a former Taiwanese exchange student who was found dead in August, 2015 with multiple stab wounds, defensive wounds and slicing wounds in her upper back. Johnson says Tellis put approximately $2,300 in charges on the card.

Tellis’s attorney, Randall Donnell, tells PEOPLE: “Given the evidence and circumstances of the case, we worked out a plea agreement that was satisfacton to all parties.”


Tellis is the prime suspect in Hsaio’s death. Johnson says that he feels “very confident that he did it,” but he says the case is almost entirely circumstantial and he will not prosecute it unless Tellis is found not guilty in Chambers’s death.
“They have a much stronger case over there,” he says. “Ours is almost an entirely circumstantial case – there was a 10-day delay before we found the body.” Johnson added there’s no DNA evidence connecting him to the crime.