[PLUG-TALK] Jury duty: read before pondering

Paul Heinlein heinlein at madboa.com
Mon Apr 16 22:02:32 UTC 2018


On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Keith Lofstrom wrote:

> So, what are Oregon's (or Washington's) jury instructions like?
>
> I've only been on one jury trial, for a young man who drove drunk 
> and against traffic.  His doting parents hired an expensive lawyer 
> who could talk rings around the inarticulate cops.
>
> I forget the jury instructions; we were there to decide the facts, 
> not follow a formula.
>
> We had an engineer (me) and a nurse on the jury.  We also had a 
> dithering fool jury who obsessed about "doubt". After we asked for 
> (and read) the relevant portions of the operation manual for the 
> breathalyzer, we decided that the lawyer was lying (a first?) and 
> that the kid and his parents were, too.  The nurse explained to the 
> ditherer the results in the ER after a head-on collision.
>
> We convicted the kid.

My wife quite recently was empaneled on a jury that went the other 
way. Without using this language, she described several jury members 
confused as to the difference between "reasonable doubt" and "possible 
to imagine."

I remember reading in the novel "Presumed Innocent" the judge 
questioning perspective jurors. It went something like this:


Judge: "Do you think this man is innocent or guilty."

Potential juror: "I don't know."

Judge: "Wrong answer. This man is innocent. You will presume him 
innocent unless the prosecutor completely convinces you otherwise. 
We presume innocence in our judicial system. Now, is this man innocent 
or guilty?"

Potential juror: "Innocent, your honor."


I'd love to see a similarly succinct dialog about "reasonable doubt."

-- 
Paul Heinlein
heinlein at madboa.com
45°38' N, 122°6' W


More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list