12 Angry Men

Does exactly what it says on the tin. Some of the nonsense contained herein may be very loosely related to The Sisters of Mercy, but I wouldn't bet your PayPal account on it. In keeping with the internet's general theme nothing written here should be taken as Gospel: over three quarters of it is utter gibberish, and most of the forum's denizens haven't spoken to another human being face-to-face for decades. Don't worry your pretty little heads about it. Above all else, remember this: You don't have to stay forever. I will understand.
Post Reply
User avatar
nodubmanshouts
Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 557
Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 06:50
Location: California

I just spent the last few days as a Jurer on a trial.

A policeman was the only witness to the crime. There was no other real evidence. The policeman's testimony was the key.

I thought the policeman lied under oath. His body language... his delivery... just wrong.

We, the jury, debated for a day. Nobody else thought the policeman lied. Several thought a policeman would never lie under oath.

At one point it was 11 to 1. The 1 was me. I stuck to my conviction that the policeman lied. I was ridiculed, and defended my position for hours.

We didn't reach a verdict. The judge called a mistrial.

The judge suggested we speak to the lawyers, so they could learn from the case. We asked the lawyers questions. Both lawyers admitted the same thing:

The policeman lied under oath multiple times. If a crime happened, it did not happen as the officer described it.

Neither lawyer could produce evidence as to his lies due a plea bargin which someone else in the case made.


I know police may lie. I've experienced it myself. What scares me is the absolute faith in the police and lack of character judgement from 11 other people.

I hope I never have to stand before a jury... the world is a bit scarier for me now



:roll: :(
Top
User avatar
eotunun
Overbomber
Posts: 3730
Joined: 06 Aug 2005, 22:24
Location: (X,Y,Z)(t)=huh!²

A close friend of mine who works for the Cologne police department once tolde that for each case of a crime the police solve they commit three crimes as to solve it. Probably mainly for so many criminals being as good at hiding what they do.
But it's no news to me that, while I have quite some faith in police and fairness of officials, there's quite some risc of encountering injustice.
"These are my principles! And if you don't like the just says so, I have others, too!"
~Rufus T. Firefly
Top
User avatar
christophe
Overbomber
Posts: 3527
Joined: 17 Jan 2004, 09:42
Location: Grinderstreet

just plain human behavior from both the police man as the jury.
sad to say I'm not surprised at all :|
Another Shade of You.
Top
User avatar
emilystrange
Above the Chemist
Posts: 9031
Joined: 03 Nov 2003, 20:26
Location: Lady Strange's boudoir.

what did the other jurors say when you were vindicated?
I don't wanna live like I don't mind
Top
User avatar
markfiend
goriller of form 3b
Posts: 21181
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
Location: st custards
Contact:
Contact markfiend

Kerry was on a jury a while ago (a series of armed robberies) and was gobsmacked at how seriously the other jurors failed to take it (if you see what I mean).

Kerry was the only one taking notes, several of the jurors had made up their minds ("he obviously did it, look at him") before the evidence was even presented, etc. etc.

Police corruption doesn't surprise me; given the appalling arrest and conviction rate, when a policeman "knows" that someone is guilty, the temptation to embellish the evidence must be very strong. Unfortunately, this embellishment can lead to the guilty walking free on a "procedural technicality", or worse, the innocent being convicted.

I don't know what the solution is. :|
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
Top
User avatar
James Blast
Banned
Posts: 24699
Joined: 11 Jun 2003, 18:58
Location: back from some place else

cut their goolies off
"And when you start to think about death, you start to think about what's after it. And then you start hoping there is a God. For me, it's a frightening thought to go nowhere".
~ Peter Steele
Top
User avatar
nodubmanshouts
Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 557
Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 06:50
Location: California

what did the other jurors say when you were vindicated?
Not much... As I walked out one women came up to me and said "you were right". But the look on their faces - especially the ones who stuck to "guilty" - was fairly priceless.... I think their world view just changed.
Top
User avatar
mh
Above the Chemist
Posts: 8091
Joined: 23 Jun 2003, 14:41
Location: A city built on rock 'n' roll

nodubmanshouts wrote:
what did the other jurors say when you were vindicated?
Not much... As I walked out one women came up to me and said "you were right". But the look on their faces - especially the ones who stuck to "guilty" - was fairly priceless.... I think their world view just changed.
Well some respect to her at least for that.
If I told them once, I told them a hundred times to put 'Spinal Tap' first and 'Puppet Show' last.
Top
User avatar
7anthea7
Slight Overbomber
Posts: 1134
Joined: 18 Mar 2006, 01:40
Location: beyond the event horizon
Contact:
Contact 7anthea7

There was a trial here recently of a police officer, for violation of civil rights and excessive use of force. It was intended to recover damages for the victim, who had not committed a crime and should never have been treated the way he was, and to force the police department, which had denied everything, to administer disciplinary action.

In the course of jury selection, somehow a woman whose husband was on another police force ended up being chosen. Needless to say, this should never have occurred, but the fact that it did means that she had to have lied to be approved - either about not having relatives in law enforcement, and/or about her ability to be objective.

Over the course of the trial and during jury deliberation, against the explicit instructions of the judge, she spoke at length about her husband's work experiences in an attempt to justify the officer's behaviour and to pressure the jury to exonerate him. He was found not guilty. One of the jurors approached the judge afterwards and told him what had occurred; he had been very concerned about the verdict, and contacted other jurors, several of whom said the same thing.

Thankfully, a mistrial was declared and the case was re-tried. However, but for someone who had the strength of character to say something, it could have gone otherwise. It certainly gives me very little faith that, should I ever end up on the wrong side of the bar, the jury would be composed of my 'peers'. :|
Who can begin conventional amiability the first thing in the morning?
It is the hour of savage instincts and natural tendencies.
--Elizabeth von Arnim
Top
User avatar
stufarq
Popweazle Piddlepoop
Posts: 3209
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 17:09
Location: my own imagination

James Blast wrote:cut their goolies off
The police, the accused or the jury?
Top
Post Reply

Return to “General Chat”