My opinions based on the '80's witch hunt

Post #210,712 by tonytib 6/9/05 8:15:06 PM Reply	My opinions based on the '80's witch hunt otherwise known as the great child care center molestation scare. Examples include: Wenatchee, WA (over 40 people indicted IIRC) Amiraults in MA (Mr. Amirault served 18 years in jail, former Gov Jane Swift denied him parole against recommendations of parole board for political reasons, and prosecuter still claims he's guilty) Miami, FL (Janet Reno's claim to fame -- before Waco and Elian -- and she's never apologized either). This case doesn't seem to be like those cases (e.g. I don't think assistant DA is running for office), but it apparently involves very young children and no physical evidence. CA law is that you can be convicted on 1 person's testimony alone, including 1 child's testimony (and yes, I do see the reason for that). Still, the jury seem to be shaping up pretty well, so I think justice will be done. At last count, 9 men and 2 women, and 1 open spot. Tony
Post #210,714 by ben_tilly 6/9/05 8:41:38 PM Reply	Ah. Makes sense. I suspect that I would not have been allowed on the jury for somewhat similar reasons. It always amazes me that we've evolved from a system where a jury was supposed to bring the wisdom and perspective of the community to the problem of justice to one in which we actively want jurors who do not know anything about the subject at hand. But when I was on a jury I was amazed at how much information the jury proved to have about a random time and location in the (large) community. I'm not sure if that knowledge should be regarded as a success or failure of the system. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #210,749 by Ashton 6/10/05 12:49:43 AM Reply	ICLRPeeDee (new thread) Created as new thread #210748 titled [link\|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=210748\|ICLRPeeDee]
Post #210,861 by tonytib 6/10/05 3:53:18 PM Reply	I think the jury will be OK It's a tough case. I have some reservations about the way things are done, but I'm not sure how a workable system could be better. My feeling, from hearing some of the jurors talk on the record and off (during the breaks) is that the jury will be critical, intelligent, and sensible. And, the DA claimed to want the right kind of juror: people would presume the defendent innocent, but would vote guilty if she could prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. The DA didn't want people who would put an extra burden on the prosecution (e.g. "beyond any doubt") and felt that I would do that. However, I did note that when the defense got someone to admit to bias, the DA would try to get them to say that was their feeling and that they could be impartial. For improvements, well for one, decent pay for jurors would really increase the jury pool and be well worth the money (considering how much money California wastes). I also have doubts about the number of pre-emptory challenges (we were up to 12 when I left). Some people (not just me) were uncomfortable with the rules of evidence -- based on the child center cases, I would have wanted to know things like "Were the witnesses prompted for evidence?" , "Did they have any contact with psychiatrists", "Did they claim a recovered memory", etc that I don't think would have been answered. I suspect from the few details I know about this case that there does seem to be a basis for the charges, IOW whether or not the charges are true, based on what the accusers told the police, they had to bring the matter to court. Which, by the way, has taken two years. BTW, I was prepared to serve, but the trial would have been a real sacrifice -- I would've had to work about 60 hours a week (30 trial, 30 at regular work) for at least two months. Tony ex-juror

Welcome to IWETHEY!