Attorneys bring up 'Dead Man Walking,' Boston Marathon bombing
FIRST-PERSON COMMENTARY (NO BYLINE)
The defendant is now growing mutton chops – the latest in facial hair styles he’s chosen since he was incarcerated nearly 3 years ago.
Should the jury live under a rock?
When Tsarnaev received the death penalty Friday for his role in the Boston Marathon bombing Friday, the verdict was social media’s hot topic within seconds. I emailed the courts right away to ask if the theater shooting jury could read about it. “Yes,” the court administrator told me. Apparently, the court order says this jury can learn about any news going on right now as long as it is not about what happened July 20th, 2012.
Guess what the shooter’s attorneys brought up first thing Monday morning?
“We are concerned,” said public defender, “Because of the parallels with that case (the Boston Marathon bombing) and this case. It carries the potential to unfair prejudice.”
In plain language, the defendant’s attorneys are worried that this jury will be influenced by another high-profile case where the jury sent a man to death.
One of the female jurors in the back row threw up her hands in what appeared to be exasperation.
Similarities
There are some striking similarities between the two cases: both have a number of deceased and injured victims, in each, a child died, and both have had significant media coverage. Finally, both events were supposed to be fun. No one had any idea blood was going to flow.
But the jury is made up of 24 people who are going home every night. Just where do you draw the line as to what they can and can’t be exposed to? As prosecutor Rich Orman protested, “Does this mean they can’t watch ‘Dead Man Walking?'” There was an execution in Texas last week. Should they not read about that? How do you coral 24 people who are not sequestered?
Another high hrofile case
Or how about the Etan Patz case. That’s the 30 year old investigation into the little boy who disappeared at the bus stop. One rogue juror of the 12 couldn’t convict the defendant, Hernandez, and it ended in a mistrial. Should the jury stay away from reading about this trial because there’s a chance one of them will see that they don’t have to agree with one another?
At the end of the day, Judge Carlos Samour asked the jurors to raise their hands if they thought Tsarnaev’s fate would influence what they eventually decide for James Holmes. No hands.
The trial is in its fourth week. These jurors must be happy they can go home and read what they want to read as long as it’s not about this case. The summer is already going to be long enough.
