12 Angry Men and Two Alternates (Part Three)

The defense has only one witness and it was Lola. She obviously was told what to wear and didn't own it judging by the fact her jacket was several sizes too large. She was definitely more calm on the stand than her mother. She mentioned church and her pastor and her boyfriends' belief in strong family as reasons she wanted to mend fences with her mother. She repeated the events of the night in question but explained that Lulu became agitated at the questioning and attacked her. She defended herself and fled with her daughter to her boyfriend's house where she was picked up and charged with OVI. The prosecutor went straight for the jugular on cross examination, revealing Lola's work as a stripper. He also got her to admit she did professional fetish work. I guess she got paid to stick her feet in some guys face while wearing leather and latex is what came to my mind. She didn't elaborate too much.She had a professional name, Trinity something or other. She had a website too that the prosecutor had a screen scrape of but the judge wouldn't allow it to be shown to us. She said she hadn't done that type of work in quite awhile.

So the defense rested, both sides gave closing arguments and then the judge explained what we had to do. It was all very clear and typed out for each of us to read once we started deliberating. Lola was presumed innocent. The state had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Lola committed Domestic Violence against Lulu. We were all in agreement that the State did so. Lola claimed self defense so she and her attorney had to prove self defense with a preponderance of evidence. That means when weighed against the states evidence, there were more things showing self defense than not. Our initial vote was 8 not guilties, 1 guilty and 3 undecideds. Each juror in turn then explained there feelings and thoughts on the case. We all agreed that neither witness was credible. So how do we decide what happened?

Remembering how agitated Lulu got during questioning and how aggressive she was on the stand, we felt she could have very easily exploded at the accusation that she was some kind of madam. Then we remembered that both of the police from Lola's boyfriend's community mentioned that she said "Even drunk, [Lola] can defend herself". Why would she say that unless she had to defend herself? She didn't know that Lulu had called the police on her. She had know way of knowing she was going to be up on Domestic Violence charges so she wasn't trying to position a defense at that time. So we the jury decided that Lulu attacked Lola and she defended herself. We found her not guilty. She broke down and cried.

After the verdict we returned to the jury room and the judge came in and answered questions. He had a couple too. When he was finished both the prosecutors and the defense attorney came in for questions and answers. It was an incredible experience and I recommend every body sit on a jury when your time comes to serve.

12 Angry Men and Two Alternates (Part Two)

Well the State of Ohio requires that Lola face her accused so Lulu had to testify. Her credibility as a witness was immediately suspect when it was revealed that she had killed her husband (who was not Lola’s dad) by shooting him once in the back of the head and then four times through the heart. She said he had ties to the Mafia and threatened to kill her. She was convicted and served seven years in prison and eleven years on parole. She has filed a vast number of appeals in her case. Twenty six were dismissed by the Supreme Court as frivolous. She maintains that she remembers nothing of the incident and she was “told” that she shot her husband. Then she went o a weird tangent saying that she had evidence that things didn’t play out the way she was told on the night she shot her husband. She wanted to know who all those men were and what they were doing on the bridge at that time in the morning. Then she said she had evidence that suggested that she wasn’t even there at all.

When asked if she saw her daughter in the courtroom, she looked around confused at first, then asked if she could take off her bifocals and put on her trifocals which were heavily tinted. After donning the glasses she took a oddly long look at Lola. I thought it was going to be a toss-up as to whether she would recognize her but she said “There she is. Wearing the nice jacket. She looks nice today.” Moms. Well aside from that she pretty much laid out the details as they occurred. Nice visit, dinner, back to the house. Then she said Lola began to accuse her of some terrible things, and saying bad things about her mom, whom she didn’t know. She thought that the mob was trying to get to her through Lola. She was sure the mob owned restaurant where they had dinner and the club where Lulu thought Lola stripped. And Lulu was sure that the Mafia had gotten to Lola since she accused Lulu of running a brothel.

If that wasn’t enough the defense brought up the fact that Lulu was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic. She testified that she was sure people were pumping gas into her house through the walls. And when she went outside, the same people hired folks to dress up as students and surround her in her wheelchair. These “students” would then release gas from their backpacks to prevent her from getting fresh air. I mention the wheelchair because she entered the courtroom with a cane. The defense tried to show that during t he time she was confined to the wheelchair she really didn’t need it and her family was appalled that she would perpetrate such a fraud. During one recess, Lulu left the courtroom to go to the restroom. When she returned it was pointed out that she didn’t take her cane which she claimed to have needed.

In Part Three I will tell you about Lola’s stripping, and professional fetish escort work (she had a web site!)

12 Angry Men and Two Alternates (Part One)

Well I just completed my civic duty for the first time. I have been a registered voter for 29 years and this is the first time I had jury duty. I must say it was an extraordinary experience. Now that the case is over I am free to talk about it as I see fit. During the two days we heard the case we could not say a single word to anyone.

I was on call all week but I didn’t have to report to the courthouse until Thursday. I showed up with a couple of books expecting to sit and wait most of the day. I think it was thirty minutes before they took about twenty five of us to the courtroom. The Judge made some opening remarks and started the “voir dire”. We were asked collectively and individually questions about our backgrounds and any feelings we might have that might bias us one way or the other. One interesting question, and I have to assume it is a standard one, was “Do any of you feel that it is not your place to judge another person?” There was one. After more questions from both sides, six potential jurors were “excused and thanked”. I was surprised that some were let go, but not surprised at the others. Because it was a criminal trial there were twelve jurors, nine men and three women and two alternates. I was juror #3.

After an hour and a half lunch the state presented its case. A woman was accused of Domestic Violence. In fact it was the third time she had been charged. The first time was a misdemeanor and the second a felony. She pleaded no contest to the first and not guilty to the second but was found guilty. We found this out after the trial. We knew she had two previous convictions when we started but they were not allowed to be considered during the trial and deliberation. They were only mentioned because if she were found guilty, it being the second felony conviction would weigh heavier. I found that rather confusing.

It appeared to be pretty open and shut. The defendant, who I will call Lola, invited her mom, who I will call Lulu, to town. They had been estranged for 10 years and Lola wanted to mend fences. After two days of peaceful visiting, Lola takes Lulu to dinner. Lola has several beers. They return to Lola’s house and begin to discuss old times. The conversation turns violent and 42 year old Lola strangles and scratches 65 year old Lulu. Lulu breaks free and flees the house. Lola leaves and goes to her boyfriend’s house in a neighboring community. Meanwhile the local police arrive and take Lulu’s statement, photograph the lacerations abrasions and bruises and then take her to the hospital where her injuries are documented in a medical report.

In the neighboring community the police are called on Lola. She and her boyfriend are having a spat. Lola leaves the scene and almost runs over a police sergeant in the process. She is pulled over by another officer and given a sobriety test. The results are inconclusive. She is taken back to her boyfriend’s house and given four more tests. She fails and is arrested for OVI. All of this is captured on the police cruiser video.

Well our verdict might surprise you given the above were all recorded facts and no less than five police officers from two different departments testified. You see the state had to put Lulu on the stand. And they had to make sure we knew Lulu, shot her husband once in the back of the head and then four times through the heart. More on Lulu in part two.