-->
Search the ArchivesNavigationContact InformationThe Citizen Newspapers For Advertising Information Email us your news! For technical difficulties |
All else accountable, so why not judge?Tue, 12/19/2006 - 4:16pm
By: Letters to the ...
I recently assisted in a trial in another county in which there were two defendants. It does not take a rocket scientist to know that a murder trial with two defendants are most likely going to take a week or two, especially since the two individuals charged with murder were tried together and not severed. Thus there would be a lot of evidence to be presented, witnesses to testify, etc., and it would most definitely be time-consuming any way you look at it. My issue is this: When a trial begins, a jury is selected. Many questions are asked of each juror, and one of the most important questions is, “Is there anything that would prevent you from being on this jury throughout the duration of the trial?” Now, this is very important, this is the time when a juror should speak up if they have a flight to catch on a specific date that might conflict with his or her ability to fulfill their job as a juror, correct? Shouldn’t a judge be held up to the same standard? If a judge has to be in another court in another county on, oh, let’s say a week after a murder trial begins, should he not remove himself and pass it over to another judge who can fulfill his duty? If not, should the judge continue the case to ensure a fair and just trial? What if the judge in open court tells the prosecutor/defense lawyers AND the jury that they’d better get the evidence/witnesses in by Friday or else he was going to make everyone come back on Saturday and Sunday until a verdict was reached so that he could make his court appearance in another county. Lastly, what if the judge states in open court in the presence of the jury that a videotape that was entered into evidence would not be allowed to be viewed again during deliberations, making it clear that a single, yet very important piece of evidence that could quite possibly provided a completely different verdict not be allowed? Is it proper or even legal for a judge to make such a call, eliminating the jury from the option of seeing the evidence had they wanted to do so? We live in the United States of America and we are all, regardless of age, race, religion, etc., entitled to a fair trial. For a judge to pressure that process just seems wrong on so many levels. Barbie Dunn |