SBI probe into possible juror misconduct

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
You have to wonder what's worse for these jurors - the weight of deciding the defendant's fate, or the scrutiny under which they fall if they decide to speak about the case after the verdict.
 
You have to wonder whether the jurors would have talked if they knew what was brewing regarding alleged communications with a jury member and another person not on the jury. After this, I bet our jurors in future trials will be very reluctant to talk at all after the trial.

I hope this is resolved quickly for everyone.
 
cody100 said:
You have to wonder whether the jurors would have talked if they knew what was brewing regarding alleged communications with a jury member and another person not on the jury. After this, I bet our jurors in future trials will be very reluctant to talk at all after the trial.

I hope this is resolved quickly for everyone.
Click to expand...

I hope they are relunctant to talk during the trial. Have any of the jurors talked about it at all?
 
I for one, am certainly relieved that JY is safely tucked into his bunk while the wheels of justice continue to turn on his behalf. I hope he is busy dreaming of his next prank he will pull on his cellmates.
 
All four jurors interviewed are incredibly articulate and intelligent. Thanks for the extra links.
 
Madeleine74 said:
The only issue being investigated by the SBI is if any juror communicated to someone outside the jury during their deliberations, as claimed by a friend of a hairdresser of a juror on Facebook.

The jurors' arrival at their verdict is not under investigation, though their comments are being publicly attacked on some mainstream and social media sites.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that besides the issue of the juror allegedly passing along deliberation status updates to a gossipy hairdresser friend, there was another juror that was possibly doing something wrong as well.

I didn't want to mention this 2nd juror until I remembreed where I read it, so I could provide you guys with the link:

Article in the Raleigh News & Observer

Another poster said a woman "met a fellow on the jury one evening and he talked about the trial the whole time." The poster said she told him "he should not speak of the trial[.] He said he was unbiased..."
Click to expand...

Their comments certainly have been attacked, and deservedly so. when the judge tells you that you that "the defendant's decision not to answer questions by law enforcement officers during the criminal investigation may not be considered against him as evidence of guilt to the pending charge." and you go on TV and say that one of the main reasons you convicted him was because of "the fact that he didn't talk," then those of us who believe in a justice system are going to attack those comments.

I know that police shows and redneck folklore have put the idea in people's heads that "if you hire an attorney, then you have something to hide." People seem to forget that it's our constitutional right, and EVEN THE COPS get attorneys when they're being looked at for a crime -- they only imply that guilty people hire lawyers when they're trying to get a statement, because unless they have PC to arrest, you're walking out the door if you ask for a lawyer. It's an investigative tool, and a pawn in the game of cop -vs- suspect... but for some reason, people treat it like it's gospel, even when a judge says not to.

OK - BACK ON TRACK :)

I've seen allegations against two of the jurors, definitely not just the one. BUt, like most people have been stating, the SBI will be able to get the issue of texts and phone calls pretty quickly. Tracking down their physical movements and talking to the people they spoke with will take longer and be more difficult. I only have two hopes - that they actually do a THOROUGH investigation on both parts, and that they provide the public with their investigative report.
 
jackleg said:
I was under the impression that besides the issue of the juror allegedly passing along deliberation status updates to a gossipy hairdresser friend, there was another juror that was possibly doing something wrong as well.

I didn't want to mention this 2nd juror until I remembreed where I read it, so I could provide you guys with the link:

Article in the Raleigh News & Observer



Their comments certainly have been attacked, and deservedly so. when the judge tells you that you that "the defendant's decision not to answer questions by law enforcement officers during the criminal investigation may not be considered against him as evidence of guilt to the pending charge." and you go on TV and say that one of the main reasons you convicted him was because of "the fact that he didn't talk," then those of us who believe in a justice system are going to attack those comments.

I know that police shows and redneck folklore have put the idea in people's heads that "if you hire an attorney, then you have something to hide." People seem to forget that it's our constitutional right, and EVEN THE COPS get attorneys when they're being looked at for a crime -- they only imply that guilty people hire lawyers when they're trying to get a statement, because unless they have PC to arrest, you're walking out the door if you ask for a lawyer. It's an investigative tool, and a pawn in the game of cop -vs- suspect... but for some reason, people treat it like it's gospel, even when a judge says not to.

OK - BACK ON TRACK :)

I've seen allegations against two of the jurors, definitely not just the one. BUt, like most people have been stating, the SBI will be able to get the issue of texts and phone calls pretty quickly. Tracking down their physical movements and talking to the people they spoke with will take longer and be more difficult. I only have two hopes - that they actually do a THOROUGH investigation on both parts, and that they provide the public with their investigative report.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, there is only the texting allegation that is being investigated. I'm not aware anything other than the one letter from Judge Stephens to the SBI which only mentions the FB posts regarding texting the jury votes.

Anything else about the other juror has only been mentioned in the news articles and it is rumors (as far as I know) and nothing has been ordered to be investigated about that. To me, for now at least, it seems to be media rumor and speculation on boards but it doesn't appear anything has been officially reported to the court about this since nothing has been ordered to be investigated.

IMO
 
I emailed the SBI and provided them with the articles, and also the full names and facebook pages of the people quoted in those articles saying that they witnessed a juror speaking about the trial in public.

I have no idea if they'll even pay attention to it, but the information is there if they want it... Even if it is made up, it won't take long to find the truth out -- so I really hope they at least talk to all the jurors and all the people who claimed to have seen jurors acting inappropriately.

After the public shaming that the SBI got when their crime lab was under investigation, I'd imagine that they will be taking this very seriously.
 
jackleg said:
I emailed the SBI and provided them with the articles, and also the full names and facebook pages of the people quoted in those articles saying that they witnessed a juror speaking about the trial in public.

I have no idea if they'll even pay attention to it, but the information is there if they want it... Even if it is made up, it won't take long to find the truth out -- so I really hope they at least talk to all the jurors and all the people who claimed to have seen jurors acting inappropriately.

After the public shaming that the SBI got when their crime lab was under investigation, I'd imagine that they will be taking this very seriously.
Click to expand...

The judge had already included the facebook postings in his request to the SBI, so they have those already. I highly doubt the SBI would relay on anything in the articles, but would instead do their own questioning of jurors.
 
Thanks, Jackleg. I guess I had assumed that the incident out in public was part of this whole inquiry. If not, it should be. I think we are all interested in getting to the bottom of this whatever the outcome may be. The SBI has always taken these things seriously beore, during, and after the so called "public shaming" that was over questionable reporting of results in one section of the laboratory during the 90's and early 2000's. But yes, I am sure the investigators will be thorough, or at least I hope so.
 
LOMom said:
The judge had already included the facebook postings in his request to the SBI, so they have those already. I highly doubt the SBI would relay on anything in the articles, but would instead do their own questioning of jurors.
Click to expand...

Of course, LO MOM, they will interview each person on that jury along with any other person involved. THey are good at this, and I wouldn't want them drilling me if I had done anything wrong.
 
Thanks for the article. I am puzzled by her statement here in this article that implies JY's silence was not a factor. Her second television interview said his silence was a factor. Sorry if this is the wrong forum to mention it, but I am curious about that.
 
cody100 said:
Thanks for the article. I am puzzled by her statement here in this article that implies JY's silence was not a factor. Her second television interview said his silence was a factor. Sorry i this is the wrong forum to mention it, but I am curious about that.
Click to expand...

perhaps the teevee interview was edited to not reflect her entire statement? That does happen...:moo:
 
To be honest, I would tend personally to believe television over News and Observer. I have seen the newspaper distort facts right in front of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 143 more.
Total: 4,031 (members: 144, guests: 3,887)

Online statistics

Members online
144
Guests online
3,887
Total visitors
4,031
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,500
Messages
17,969,996
Members
228,788
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top