A poster recently made the comment that 'our justice system is screwed up.'
Rather than debatng the topic, I thought it'd be interesting to have a thread for posters to tell stories of their own personal experiences with the criminal justice system.
What trials have you had direct contact with personally? That should provide some randomness to the examples. (Jokes about the posted being a defendant not welcome).
I'll start with three stories, the first two as a juror, the third as an observer (yes, I spent free time to go watch a random trial).
Trial one: black male bus driver charged with assault and battery against white male passenger. Someone left an umbrella on the bus the passenger found and he asked the driver what to do with it. Their testimony was completely contradictory, in one version the bus driver responding to the question with screaming, name-calling and threats, and in the other the passenger doing the same. In one version, the passenger threw the umbrella at the driver and it went under the pedals creating danger, in the other the passenger gently put the umbrella safely next to the driver. There was one witness - a little old lady named Mrs. Gilligan who 'heard yelling and covered her eyes not wanting to see the conflict'. No help with who did what.
The incident occured when the passenger says he was going to get off the bus before his stop out of fear of the driver, but as he exited decided that was ridiculous and turned around to sit down again, and the bus driver came after him and attacked. In the bus driver's version, he just saw this hostile passenger starting to exit and then turn around and come back up the steps directly at him, and in reasonably fear, he hit the passenger first as he came up the steps (the law excuses that).
There was evidence that the beating by the driver was extensive.
Result: the jury felt the driver was 'probably guilty' and about half first voted guilty, but ended up deciding it did not meet the 'reasonable doubt' standard.
The jury rode the elevator down with the freed defendant who was crying with joy and told him we believed he was probably guilty and he might not be so lucky next time.
Trial 2: Man charged with drunk driving. The trial issue was whether the arresting officer was correct in saying that the driver and passenger had switched places while he was pulling them over, while at a red light, or whether the defendat was right in saying they'd simply leaned down to pick up papers that had fallen when they stopped at the light - he arrested the passenger on that basis. Again, the testimony was in complete opposition - such as the defense saying the two had on on similar painters clothing spattered in paint, and the officer saying they had on distinct street clothing. The jury finally considered the location where the officer was and his view, and one juror owned the same truck and it had a small bakc window so the officer couldn't have conclusively seen that they traded places. Not guilty, though 'quite possibly guilty, just lucky to have reasonable doubt'.
Third case: a white man in his 50's who happened to be a lawyer charged with violence against his wife, a young woman from South America who got citizenship by coming here.
The evidence was interesting in the part of the trial that I saw, that the doctor who had seen the woman had not kept the basic documentation required by law, and was admitting in court to something he could be charged for; the defendant felt he had done so trying to help the woman's case, and it further came out the doctor had later hired the woman to clean his apartment.
On the incident, the evidence was mainly a photo of the woman showing her with a cut lip, and her testimony he had slapper her.
However, I spoke with the defendant and some interesting things came out - he said he had medical evidence that his arm was very injured at the time of the incident and could not come anywhere near the motion she alleged; her injuries seemed to me inconsistent with the slap she described. His story was that when she called the police and he was arrested, for five months after that he was barred from entering the home he owned while she lived there with her boyfirend who immediately moved in.
I asked him how she got the cut lip and he said she bit it - which the injury looked consistent with.
I was initially suspicious of him but came to view him as quite possibly innocent.
I asked later what happened and was told it was a hung jury. I don't know if he'll be retried.
Anyway, those are a few examples of 'real trials'.
Rather than debatng the topic, I thought it'd be interesting to have a thread for posters to tell stories of their own personal experiences with the criminal justice system.
What trials have you had direct contact with personally? That should provide some randomness to the examples. (Jokes about the posted being a defendant not welcome).
I'll start with three stories, the first two as a juror, the third as an observer (yes, I spent free time to go watch a random trial).
Trial one: black male bus driver charged with assault and battery against white male passenger. Someone left an umbrella on the bus the passenger found and he asked the driver what to do with it. Their testimony was completely contradictory, in one version the bus driver responding to the question with screaming, name-calling and threats, and in the other the passenger doing the same. In one version, the passenger threw the umbrella at the driver and it went under the pedals creating danger, in the other the passenger gently put the umbrella safely next to the driver. There was one witness - a little old lady named Mrs. Gilligan who 'heard yelling and covered her eyes not wanting to see the conflict'. No help with who did what.
The incident occured when the passenger says he was going to get off the bus before his stop out of fear of the driver, but as he exited decided that was ridiculous and turned around to sit down again, and the bus driver came after him and attacked. In the bus driver's version, he just saw this hostile passenger starting to exit and then turn around and come back up the steps directly at him, and in reasonably fear, he hit the passenger first as he came up the steps (the law excuses that).
There was evidence that the beating by the driver was extensive.
Result: the jury felt the driver was 'probably guilty' and about half first voted guilty, but ended up deciding it did not meet the 'reasonable doubt' standard.
The jury rode the elevator down with the freed defendant who was crying with joy and told him we believed he was probably guilty and he might not be so lucky next time.
Trial 2: Man charged with drunk driving. The trial issue was whether the arresting officer was correct in saying that the driver and passenger had switched places while he was pulling them over, while at a red light, or whether the defendat was right in saying they'd simply leaned down to pick up papers that had fallen when they stopped at the light - he arrested the passenger on that basis. Again, the testimony was in complete opposition - such as the defense saying the two had on on similar painters clothing spattered in paint, and the officer saying they had on distinct street clothing. The jury finally considered the location where the officer was and his view, and one juror owned the same truck and it had a small bakc window so the officer couldn't have conclusively seen that they traded places. Not guilty, though 'quite possibly guilty, just lucky to have reasonable doubt'.
Third case: a white man in his 50's who happened to be a lawyer charged with violence against his wife, a young woman from South America who got citizenship by coming here.
The evidence was interesting in the part of the trial that I saw, that the doctor who had seen the woman had not kept the basic documentation required by law, and was admitting in court to something he could be charged for; the defendant felt he had done so trying to help the woman's case, and it further came out the doctor had later hired the woman to clean his apartment.
On the incident, the evidence was mainly a photo of the woman showing her with a cut lip, and her testimony he had slapper her.
However, I spoke with the defendant and some interesting things came out - he said he had medical evidence that his arm was very injured at the time of the incident and could not come anywhere near the motion she alleged; her injuries seemed to me inconsistent with the slap she described. His story was that when she called the police and he was arrested, for five months after that he was barred from entering the home he owned while she lived there with her boyfirend who immediately moved in.
I asked him how she got the cut lip and he said she bit it - which the injury looked consistent with.
I was initially suspicious of him but came to view him as quite possibly innocent.
I asked later what happened and was told it was a hung jury. I don't know if he'll be retried.
Anyway, those are a few examples of 'real trials'.
Facebook
Twitter