Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Trained Observer posted the following comment yesterday at 6:28 pm. I have decided to use it as a scorecard for the next round of voir dire.
I recommend we use it as a starting point for our discussions during the day about the various prospective jurors. Feel free to agree or disagree with her recommendations. By actively involving yourselves in the process of selecting and exercising challenges while witnessing the lawyers doing the same thing, you will be participating in a unique learning experience.
I do not believe this has ever been done before, so celebrate and learn.
The selection process is described below the scorecard.
My recommendations for next round, hoping hardship rids line-up of some “iffy” candidates, and strikes can be saved for a final shaping after defense squanders its share. (Admittedly, there’s so very much we don’t know about these PJs.)
B-12: Middle-aged white female; works late shift. Likes CSI, says she’d heard Fogen followed Trayvon. KEEP FOR NOW
B-29: Hispanic female nurse on an Alzheimer ward with 7 kidsl lived in windy Chicago at time of shooting. WEED OUT ON HARDSHIP
B-76: White middle-aged female who says Fogen had an “altercation with the young man. There was a struggle and the gun went off.” TRY TO WEED OUT
B-7: Middle-aged white male; NPR listener. Recalls when Florida implemented “stand your ground” and debate over whether needed.KEEP
B-35: Middle-aged black male owning a vending biz. Critical of Sharpton & Jackson; says this case not racial. KEEP
B-37: Middle-aged white female who works for a chiropractor and has a ton of of pets. Described protests in Sanford as “rioting.” STRIKE-OLA
B-51: Retired white female from Oviedo with a dog and 20-year-old cat. Knows a good deal about the case, but said “I’m not rigid in my thinking.” KEEP
B-86: Middle-aged white female working at middle school. Says if Trayvon had not been “expelled” from school in Miami — she oughta know the diff between expelled and suspended — “this could have been prevented.” DUH, WEED OUT
E-6: A young white female and mother who used to work in financial services. Used case as teaching moment for her kids, warning them to not go out late. KEEP
E-40: White female in 60s living in Iowa at shooting; heard about on national news and recalls shooting in a gated community and a teen killed. KEEP
E-54: Middle-aged white male with teenage stepson who wears hoodies. Saw photos of Fogen’s head and face with boo-boos. KEEP
E-73: Middle-aged white female from Sanford’s artsy community, raising late brother’s 15- and 18-year-olds. Says media interjected race in case. KEEP FOR NOW
M-75: Young AA female says many friends have opinions on case, but claims she doesn’t.KEEP
B-61: Young white female; remembers “after the protesters, it seemed to turn more into a racial issue…I don’t think it’s a racial issue.” KEEP
B-72: Young male doing maintenance at a school and competes in arm wrestling. Avoids news because he does not want to be “brainwashed.” TRY TO WEED OUT
E-22: Middle-aged AA female; says after shooting Sanford police should have booked Fogen and asked more questions. KEEP
E-13: Young white female collegiate who works two jobs; Heard shooting was a “racial thing.” KEEP FOR NOW.
E-28: Middle-aged white female nurse; claims she knows little about case and has no opinion about Fogen’s guilt. KEEP
K-80: Middle-aged white female with kids who has not followed case; Cconsiders “racial undertones” in case “disturbing.” WEED OUT ON HARDSHIP
K-95: Middle-aged woman who’s a full-time student and “IT geek” with two kids; Critical of protests calling for Fogen’s arrest. TRY TO WEED OUT
P-67: Native Mexican wants to serve on the jury, describing civic duty. “Some people think it is a racist thing,” he said of the shooting. A KEEPER
G-14: Middle-aged white female who recalls a “lot of anger, a lot of people upset” that Fogen was not arrested immediately. KEEP
G-29: Young black female has lived in Seminole County for eight months. Cites racial tension build-up, but claims she “stayed away from it.” KEEP
G-47: Young white male assistant restaurant manager says Fogen appears to be “stuck in the worst situation” possible. KEEP FOR NOW
?-63: Young, unemployed apparently mixed race male. Knows a little about case but pans stereotyping and says people sometimes interject race into cases . KEEP FOR NOW
G-66: Retired white female who cares for toddler grandson and moved to Central Florida in 2011. Saw photos of Fogen injuries and, “I felt sorry for him.” STRIKERAMA
G-81: Tall black male lives less than a half mile from shooting. Cites Sanford’s racial divide, but says media has misportrayed the city. KEEP
H-6: Young white male who heard call Fogen made to cops before shooting. “He sounded like he was concerned for his neighborhood.” TRY TO WEED OUT
H-7: Red-haired 50s male in a biz suit citing a “big brouhaha in Sanford,” describesd protesters as “a nuisance” and says “I still don’t know why it became a high profile case.” STRIKOLA
H-18: A dark-skinned looker in his 20s with accent who’s a mechanic, owns his shop with a partner and moved here from Kuwait. Avoids discussing certain topics. “When it’s politics, religion or race, I just don’t get involved.” KEEP
H-29: White-haired male calls national civil rights leaders who led protests in Sanford “a little circus come to town.” Says “negative for the city,” … “That honestly turned me off.” TRY TO WEED OUT
H-35: Young female who said she knows little about case. She “liked” a photo of Trayvon on Facebook. Needs to move by and of June, claiming hardship. WEED OUT ON HARDSHIP
H-81: Middle aged male (a lawyer? What kind of lawyer? Does he sit around all day looking at real estate contracts … or does he do trial work?) describes shooting as an “incident” between Fogen and Trayvon; calls shooting a “very tragic situation.” He has two pending civil cases before Nelson. KEEP FOR NOW
H-69: Preggers PJ who saw news about case on TV at work. Mentions several times that she recalled seeing pictures of Trayvon as “a young child.” WEED OUT ON HARDSHIP
H-86: Young white female says she knows almost nothing about the case. Says she keeps up with current events, but “certain cases and things I don’t follow.” KEEP
I-5: Middle-aged AA male says he heard self-defense was involved with case, at one point referring to Fogen as “gentleman that was defending himself.” KEEP
I-19: Young white female says she hasn’t followed case and knows only basics: “I don’t watch the news, I don’t read the news,” she, who lies or is really stupid, said. STRIKE
I-24: Older white woman who followed case at first, but then “just kinda tuned out.” Says “a young man lost his life and another man is fighting for his life.” STRIKE
I-33: Older white male, saying “more I heard, the less I wanted to hear.” Heard a 911 call involved in case, and “some controversy as to who was doing the screaming” heard. TRY TO WEED OUT
I-44: Dad of 3 says he’s skeptical of media and its “negativity.” Calls himself a “sports nut.” KEEP FOR NOW
I have previously described the process of group voir dire as follows:
When she gets to 40, she will gather that group together seating the PJs in the jury box, and subsequently the benches, in the order in which they were called and likely instruct them to raise their hands indicating an affirmative answer as she asks a series of questions, pausing to record each PJ’s affirmative answer to each question.
For example, she might ask for a show of hands by each PJ who has been a victim of a crime and write down each PJs number who raises their hand.
After she completes her list of questions, the lawyers, starting with Bernie de la Rionda, will question the first PJ on the list (B12) regarding each question she answered affirmatively. After both lawyers have finished with B12, they will pass or challenge her for cause. If she is excused, she will be replaced in the box by PJ B51 (she is 7th in the order).
This process will be repeated with B51 until she is passed or excused for cause. If she is excused, her seat will be taken by B55. If she is passed, the lawyers will question B29, the PJ in the second seat in the box.
This procedure likely will be followed until 30 PJs have been passed for cause.
Then the lawyers will exercise their peremptory challenges, which is usually done secretly with the lawyers passing back and forth a sheet of paper alternately listing a PJ number until one or both sides exhaust their allotment of peremptory challenges.
If one side accepts the jury of 6 before exhausting their peremptories, they retain the right to use a peremptory challenge to excuse the PJ who replaces a member of the jury struck by their opponent after they accepted the jury.
Here’s the link to the livestream coverage.
Court resumes at 9 am EDT.
See you in court.
(H/T to Trained Observer for the excellent list)
Your continuing support allows me to continue posting independent articles like this.
Please consider making a donation to keep independent journalism alive.