In the matter of the State of California versus Shawn Smith, we found the defendant guilty of simple battery and not guilty of false imprisonment and obstructing a police report.
It took us 3x longer to deliberate on the case than it took the attorneys to present it. The only evidence was the police testimony and the alleged victim's testimony, and she just kept saying "I can't remember" because she didn't want her boyfriend to get in trouble. So it was really hard to figure out the "facts"! On top of that, half the deliberations were just convincing the other jurors to do what they had promised to do at the very beginning of service:
- Keep their own life experiences out of the deliberations. One guy said, "well if THAT's battery then I should be in jail many times over!" OK I'm scared!
- Not consider punishment when deciding guilt or innocence. 2 of the jurors decided that the prosecutor was just harrassing this guy, who had "suffered enough" just from being arrested and processed! Even though according to the law, he did commit a crime!
- READ the law! There were people who refused to open up their juror packets! At one point I actually couldn't take it anymore and opened a guy's packet for him and said READ IT.
One guy told me I was very smart and "made a lot of sense", but because I was a woman I could never be effective in swaying him. It was an exercise in persuasion... as someone who persuades others for a living, it was fascinating to see the limits of my personal influence.
All in all, it was a very interesting few days, though I really could not afford the time away from work and had to work at night and during the lunch hours as a result. I would recommend it to everyone... don't try to get out of your service, it's a great experience and reminds you of what a populace-driven system of government we have.