My experience on a murder trial jury...

http://news.google.com/newspapers/p/st_petersburg?id=kfILAAAAIBAJ&sjid=81kDAAAAIBAJ&pg=3896,343555&dq=steven+peter+anderson+trial&hl=en

   In 1986, when I was 31 years old & we were still living in St. Pete, I was picked to be a juror on a high profile murder case in Clearwater, Florida. It was all over the TV and newspapers. If the link works above you can go read about it. It was one of the weirdest weeks of my life. I tried very hard to be a good jurist, not watching the news or reading the paper.

   A 34 year old Clearwater cop told a story of his 22 year old fiance, who was a Clearwater PD dispatcher, pointing a gun at him in an argument. He said he put her in a submission choke hold & she died. Then he said he panicked & put a belt around her neck to make it look like someone strangled her. In opening, his defense team said he made a tragic mistake but it was really just an accident. In looking at the guy, he was a clean cut young man & seemed remorseful. It all seemed very reasonable for a 2nd degree manslaughter charge.

         Then the prosecutors got up there & painted a whole different story...   

  They told about his temper & about how the two argued all the time & were very possessive. She was maybe even thinking of breaking off the engagement. And then they brought out the forensics experts. They showed us gruesome pictures of the autopsy & pointed out the webbed belt marks on the outside of her neck. But then...they showed us pics of the inside of her neck. They had filleted the skin back to show the muscles of her neck, which very clearly showed the webbed belt marks. Then the bombshell...only if she were STILL ALIVE would these marks show up on these muscles! The bastard strangled her with a belt & came up with this bogus story!

       You could have heard a pin drop in the courtroom....

   I'll never forget the look of shock on this guys face...realizing that the forensics had got him. They went on to show us other evidence like her eyes & blood pressure & stuff to back up their story. It seemed very convincing to me. So weird...a few days before I was ready to let him off lightly, and now I know he's a cold blooded murderer. So the defense in closing tries to refute the evidence & play on the emotion of him being a cop & a young guy etc. etc.

  So we go back in the jury room to deliberate. I'm thinking it's going to be pretty unanimous. We vote...and there's two holdouts! What the hell...we don't want a hung jury! It turns out it's two older ladies who were saying "but he's so young, we don't want to ruin his life..." I was incredulous & passionate about putting this guy away as were the rest of us. So basically we had to browbeat these ladies for about 3 hours till they finally submitted to reason. This is what goes on back in deliberation rooms.

  So, long story short...we find him guilty. The judge says we have to come back & pass sentence the next day. He was up for the death penalty & I was very uneasy having to contribute to THAT decision. But luckily the judge decided on his own to give him life with no parole. So as I type this...the guy is still sitting in prison 25 years later. He's now 59 years old. Weird...


What little moral there may be to this story is...you can't judge a jury for their finding. They are just normal people trying to do a very difficult job under surreal circumstances. And until you've been in that jury room deliberating on somebodies life...there's no way you can know all the back stage behind the scenes stuff that goes on. Do your civic duty & show up when your name is called... you might find it fascinating...