|
When you finally get to trial, all of your motions will be decided if they weren't decided before trial began. If you did good work things may not go beyond this point. If this is not what happens your next step is jury selection.
Jury selection is also called in legalese vior dire and if it is happening to you is very dire indeed. Jury selection is pretty self-explanatory. You try to take the best jurors for your side while a prosecutor is going to pick the best for his side. The process begins with a packed courtroom. In my case jurors had to stand there were so many.
The first question asked the group is about the amount of time the trial will cover and if anyone has a scheduling problem. With each question jurors are eliminated. The next question concerns the nature of the charges and does anyone feel they couldn’t be fair and impartial because of the charges in this trial. I have a real problem with telling this to a jury. Sure, those who can't remain fair and impartial because of some events in their life are going to bow out, but in alerting the jury to the nature of the offense I believe it sets the accused up to have a stealth or rogue jurror. Voir dire relies on potential jurors being honest about their impartiality, but by alerting them to the nature of the offense you're inviting anyone who is biased the chance to become a jurror and get revenge or satisfaction by convicting the accused and all they have to do is a lie about their impartiality. I would rather deal with one or two jurors that have a bias and have to wrestle with it because they got sucked into the trial, than invite the entire jury to attack me.
In jury selection each side gets what are called preemptory strikes. You get to remove some jurors that the prosecutor wants and the prosecutor gets to remove the same number of yours. From the defense point of view you don't want cops, friends of cops or the court. I wouldn't want someone who watches Bill O'Riley, Montell Williams or Opra on television. In addition I would not want teachers, counselors, psychologists, psychiatrists or emergency room nurses and doctors. And I definitely wouldn't want someone who works at CPS. Jury selection goes by way to quickly and you should do your best to slow the process down so nothing slips by. In my case a friend of a sheriff got on my jury and I never knew it until I reviewed my court transcripts.
After jury selection opening statements are given. The opening statements have few regulations. They do not have to contain facts like closing statements do. In the trial the prosecution goes first on everything from opening statements to the calling of witnesses. It is best as the witnesses for the state testify, that you make notes of all the inaccuracies and lies made by the state's witnesses. Then give your notes to your attorney for cross-examination of the witness. By doing it this way, little will get missed by your attorney and the cross-examination will be more effective. The state always calls its witnesses first and it can seem at this time to be a bit overwhelming or that you are destined to lose. You must remind yourself that the jury hasn't heard your side of the story yet and that things can change quickly.
After the state rests its case your attorney should request a rule 20 motion. Rule 20 determines if the state has presented enough evidence for conviction. Rule 20 is decided by the judge and from my experience is seldom given. Don't get upset if you don't get a rule 20 because you're next at bat.
Sometimes the prosecutor will believe that a piece of evidence is related to the religious beliefs of the accused. This happened in my trial. This is very thin ice for a prosecutor to be standing on because one instance of overzealousness or a slip of the tongue and a mistrial can be declared on the spot if you have a good attorney who knows the rules of court. Unfortunately I didn't. A mistrial is where the prosecutor and sometimes the judge, commit an error that violates the law to the extent that your rights have been violated and the jury is now tainted because of it. Judges and prosecutor's hate mistrials. Judges don’t like them because it's a bad mark on them that they either caused or allowed it to happen. Prosecutor's hate mistrials because they have to start over from jury selection or drop the charges. Trials are not cheap just see the look on their faces in traffic court when you tell them you want to go to trial with the photos you took of the skid marks on the road if you don't believe me.
In trial you should take the position that although the prosecutor may have gained the upper hand temporarily by violating the law to gain your conviction, he's actually done you a favor. Don't worry if they violate the law to get you, as long as you object to it, your claim is preserved for appeal. If your attorney fails to object to something you have a right to object yourself. It doesn't matter if you don't express yourself like a lawyer, the law doesn't require you to. In addition to that, every person in that courtroom has a responsibility to make certain you understand what is going on in that courtroom. If they deny your objection they have to explain it till you understand why. No legalese, just a plain language commonsense explanation. Make them honest men and women, because they sure aren’t going to be on their own. I’m quite certain that lawyers have no hearts in their bodies. I think law school removes them somehow.
If the verdict is guilty don't be stupid and resist your incarceration. There's no escape, except to win on appeal and retrial. This is what you must do and you will do it.
For questions or comments about this web site contact: jcoghill2@cox.net
