On the road…again!
Afghanistan to Zambia
Chronicles of a Footloose Forester
By Dick Pellek

 

 Lobbying To Be Jury Foreman

 

An anarchist like the Footloose Forester does not like to take orders or give orders, so most times he stayed in the background and lived his life as a lone wolf who was content to challenge only himself while ignoring what other people did to elevate themselves in the public spotlight.  One time, however; he found himself eagerly lobbying to get himself elected to the position of Jury Foreman in a criminal trial.

The case was a criminal trial of a suspect accused of breaking into his girlfriend’s apartment, beating her senseless in a fit of drunken, jealous rage, and resisting arrest when her friends called the police to apprehend him.  The accused was on trial in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania for aggravated assault, as the most serious of the five charges against him.  His girlfriend had a broken jaw as a result of his affection for her.

As often as Footloose Forester had previously been witness to circumstances where justice had not been served, he wanted to prevent a potentially indifferent and ill-informed jury from reaching a verdict that might not be linked to all of the facts in the case.  Since he had spent countless weeks in full-day deliberations and numerous meetings over the years during which supposedly well-informed participants had reached conclusions not justified by the facts, he was honestly afraid that the upcoming trial would also be one of those in which poorly educated and opinionated jurors would try to sway others with their opinions; and not with the evidence at hand.  He had been shocked at the number of times in the past that personal opinions had trumped facts in the settlement of an argument, a debate, or a policy deliberation. It didn’t matter if the participants in those previous sessions were all college-educated or not, people very often let their opinions rule their decisions.  The Footloose Forester did not want to be a part of another demoralizing decision where facts took a back seat to a forceful speaker showering them with unsubstantiated opinions.

In the present criminal case, it was the physical evidence that formed the strength of the prosecution’s case; but even then it was clear enough that some jurors didn’t think that the evidence was strong enough to convict.  Before we could act as a single body of jurors, however; we were instructed to elect a Jury Foreman from among us.  That is when Footloose Forester started to lobby on his own behalf.

 

The Jury Foreman guides the jury on procedures and reports the verdict to the Judge

 

As is quite typical in many groups, fully 9-10 of the others were not interested in being the foreman; or were diffident about taking on that role.  Only one forceful male showed any interest in taking on the job.  Fortunately, he did not convince others that he would be better suited to the task.  For his part, the Footloose Forester mentioned to them that he had prior courtroom experience as an Expert Witness, and had some acquaintance with rules of evidence and legal procedures.  But the real reason why he wanted to be Jury Foreman was so he could establish the procedural guidelines whereby each and every juror had an equal opportunity to speak for as long as they wanted; and also a second-round opportunity to reconsider their views before casting their vote for guilt or innocence.

Harking back to those past decades, he recalled events when certain forceful speakers dominated conversations and debates to the point of winning the day through force major, not by their winning arguments.  In his mind, the Footloose Forester presumed that this group was going to be no different in letting their personal opinions get the best of their ability to analyze the evidence.   On numerous occasions in the past, he was not given the opportunity to speak while his colleagues or opponents had the floor—which they occupied for as long as they could; until the session was adjourned.  To this day, he considers such tactics as unjust.  Footloose Forester was determined to permit everyone to speak and was going to insist that they do so.

When he was elected as Jury Foreman, he had the opportunity to set down the guidelines that they would follow.  Even so, our little jury pool did not convict on one count of a previous assault by the defendant on his girlfriend, because most of them said that the presumed evidence was hearsay, and not reliable.  It was, however; written testimony provided by two different people but, in the end, the Footloose Forester could not convince the other jurors that written testimony is a legitimate form of evidence. The case was otherwise not very contentious, however; and the defendant was convicted on four of the five counts against him.  He is presently serving 30 years in a Pennsylvania prison.