Jury Duty Part V: Reflections

Note: to read the case from the beginning start here

After the verdict we left the court room and went back to the Jury Room to wait for the Judge.

She thanked us again for our service and told us that the verdicts we gave were the ones that we had to based on the information we had. I'm still not certain whether she told us that to reassure us, or whether she truly believed it.

We asked some of the questions that had been bothering us. One of the biggest was that it seemed to us that someone could beat the DUI rap by refusing to take the Roadside Maneuvers as well as refusing the Blood Test (which prevented the prosecution from having a number introduced.)

The judge told us that there was a consequence to refusing the blood test--mandatory suspension of the driver's license for a year. We then asked if the prosecutor could have brought that information in, and the judge replied sure, she could have simply asked the defendant if his license had been suspended as a result of his refusal.

From the reaction of the other jurors, this simple fact probably would have changed the outcome of the trial. I'm still not convinced I would have gone for the DUI, but I would have been more likely to convict on the DWAI.

My overriding feeling is that the prosecutor blew it. She kept on pushing this idea that he didn't let us "look in his bag" while not letting us know that there was a huge consequence to not letting us look in his bag. She also put the forensic expert on the stand for no purpose, BTW--the delay on the first afternoon, was a hearing on whether or not the judge should allow the forensic expert to even testify! If I had any advice for the Prosecutor it would be to not overlook anything.

I'm sure the defense attorney thinks he did a great job, but IMO he didn't. But he didn't have to. The prosecution never really made the case, so there was nothing to really defend. I was actually annoyed by him asking the same questions the prosecutor had asked seemingly to confirm something to us. His one brilliant moment came when he only asked the one question to the forensic witness, and then promptly sat down. Had he made some attempt to defend the turn signal charge, he may have gotten his client completely off.

I think there's a good chance that the defendant "got away with it," but hopefully if he was drinking or drunk, he considers what he did and how much it cost him to successfully defend the charges. The next time he might be up against a better prosecutor, or this one learns from the experience.

Overall Jury duty was interesting enough, and I'd like to do it again. When I watch cases on TV or the movies, I realize you see all the sides and back and forth, but the one amazing thing to me is that--other than the things that were said in the courtroom, that we were told to disregard--the court system really did prevent us from hearing or seeing things that would prejudice our decision.

The other thing to keep in mind is that you really do have to decide the case on what's presented in court, and not personal feelings that develop regarding the participants.

Have a Totally Gruntled Day!