June 14, 2002
Unexpected civic duty (3) We’re done. Here’s the Daily News story. As usual, there are small inaccuracies: for instance, our jury deliberated for at least four to five hours, not three.
It was an interesting experience. More on this after I’ve caught up on some work. [09:14 AM]
Gary Farber ::: (view all by) ::: June 14, 2002, 08:43 PM:
First-degree murder. When you do jury duty, you don't do it small.
I'm curious: did the death penalty apply as a possibility in this case? If so, did the DA's office not seek it? And if it had, and they had sought it, might you care to say how you might have voted on that?
I look forward to the rest of your write-up, in any, er, case.
Patrick Nielsen Hayden ::: (view all by) ::: June 14, 2002, 09:30 PM:
They told us in jury selection that it wasn't a death penalty case. Had it been, I would have been obliged to point out that I'm opposed to the death penalty.
More to come later. It was an interesting experience, and I want to think about it a while.
Hard-Hitting Moderator: Teresa Nielsen Hayden.
Comments on Unexpected civic duty (3):