Juror Malfeasance
This is something that doesn’t get enough attention. The criminal justice system in the United States is very heavily weighted toward conviction and judges are reluctant to overturn jury verdicts.
High profile criminal cases such as the murder trial of OJ Simpson have many complaining that Simpson bought his way to an acquittal while simultaneously blaming the jury for not producing the desired verdict.
The usual outcome though, is a conviction that resulted from a jury having a lackadaisical attitude or a jury that feels pressured to convict by other factors than the facts.
A recent case involving a death and drunk driving has brought this out again. On 24 September, 2005, Michael S. Nollenberg struck pedestrian James Weber with his pickup truck. Both were legally drunk. Weber later died.
Weber was wearing dark clothing and was walking along the side of an unlighted road after bar closing. After the accident there were problems. A gurney holding Weber collapsed and threw the victim on the ground. The victim was held in an ambulance on the scene for over an hour waiting for a medical helicopter.
Nollenberg was charged with Homicide by Intoxicated Use of Vehicle and Homicide by Use of Vehicle with Prohibited Alcohol Content (PAC), each a class B felony. The charges are very similar, almost duplicates. If there is any difference, it is that Homicide by Intoxicated Use of Vehicle has a lower threshold for charging.
A jury found Nollenberg guilty on 14 December, 2007 of the PAC charge. In April 2008, he was sentenced to four years in prison.
Now a juror has admitted that she was compelled to convict because she knew people related to the victim, including his mother, and she recognized them at trial. She also expressed some fear of retaliation if the jury returned a not guilty verdict.
This was a person who broke the law when she did not make her bias and fear known. She gave an oath that she would fairly and impartially decide the case at issue
She was not the only person on this jury who misbehaved. Another was late for trial after he visited the accident scene on his way to court. He violated the law by disregarding jury instructions to use only evidence presented at trial.
There were other problems. The prosecution took too much time, and the defense attorney, Mary Lou Robinson, did not present evidence of results of the delay in medical treatment and the dropping of the victim by ambulance personnel as factors in the victim’s death.
At a hearing on 01 October, 2008, Robinson admitted that she “dropped the ball” at the trial by not challenging key issues. One of the jurors later stated that if the medical treatment evidence and been presented, the outcome might have been different.
But, the real problem here is the two jurors who violated their oath of office.
This is a problem when jurors are flippant about their responsibility. In April, 2000, a Kentucky jury found a man guilty of murder by flipping a coin. In 2007, a Madison, Wisconsin jury found Brendan Dassey guilty of rape and murder, without any evidence, after they stopped listening during the proceedings. After a good meal paid for by Calumet County, this group didn’t even deliberate before turning in a verdict.
Of course, jurors also ignore clear evidence of guilt and acquit.
Some jurors in the Nollenberg case didn’t want to return on Saturday for more deliberations and that influenced deliberations.
It is a bit of a crap shoot to depend on juries to do the right thing. It can be difficult even with a dedicated jury to sort out the facts and testimony. Rushed jurors are more likely to take the quickest way even if that means placing a person’s life on the toss of a coin.
The legal system also contributes. It is a joke when a judge tells a jury they must not allow emotions to color their deliberations. I observed prosecutors using emotion in attempts to sway a jury. In the Brendan Dassey trial, there was little beside false and inflammatory testimony by law enforcement and emotional prosecutor to make the case. There was a portion of one of the recorded confessions by Dassey to add to the histrionics. Here the judge help the prosecution by barring the other confessions that really undercut the case. But, this was a self-centered jury that didn’t need facts anyway.
I don’t expect the misbehaving jurors to suffer consequences for their poor attitudes. Putting jurors in jail would only increase the corrupt nature of prosecution in Wisconsin. It would also distract the honest juror if they had to worry about a grandstanding prosecutor using them a scapegoat in a not guilty verdict.
And, we want misbehaving jurors to own up to their bad behavior. I would expect jurors who don’t follow the rules to lie if they face consequences.
This may be an opportunity for the judge to publicize the cost of the malfeasance. Nollenberg certainly deserves a new trial. That will cost the family of the victim, the accused and his family, and Outagamie County.
This can also be an opportunity for citizen jury awareness. After all, this can be an awesome responsibility, nonetheless it is a citizen responsibility. This is deciding the fate of another human.
by Brian McCorkle
in category Criminal Justice,Rants
