Full Version: Jury Tampering
This topic is inspired by the current Tyco trial. It appears that there is one juror, out of twelve, that has been tainted. At one point he's has even made the " 
" sign to the defense. Now if the jury has been tampered with, the only thing the judge can do is declare a mistrial. If this happens then the defendants walk, because it would be double jeopardy to try them again. I think (that means not sure) in order to get a retrial they would need to prove that the defense tampered with the jury.
Would you declare a mistrial?
Do we need to change the system so that jury tampering can be prevented?
" sign to the defense. Now if the jury has been tampered with, the only thing the judge can do is declare a mistrial. If this happens then the defendants walk, because it would be double jeopardy to try them again. I think (that means not sure) in order to get a retrial they would need to prove that the defense tampered with the jury. Would you declare a mistrial?
Do we need to change the system so that jury tampering can be prevented?
QUOTE(Rev_DelFuego @ Mar 29 2004, 04:58 PM)
This topic is inspired by the current Tyco trial. It appears that there is one juror, out of twelve, that has been tainted. At one point he's has even made the " " sign to the defense. Now if the jury has been tampered with, the only thing the judge can do is declare a mistrial. If this happens then the defendants walk, because it would be double jeopardy to try them again. I think (that means not sure) in order to get a retrial they would need to prove that the defense tampered with the jury.
Would you declare a mistrial?
" sign to the defense. Now if the jury has been tampered with, the only thing the judge can do is declare a mistrial. If this happens then the defendants walk, because it would be double jeopardy to try them again. I think (that means not sure) in order to get a retrial they would need to prove that the defense tampered with the jury. Would you declare a mistrial?
I kinda figured this one juror had to have been paid off because that
that was mentioned was a dead giveaway.Would i declare a mistrial? Might as well. This guy is tainted. But i would ask for an investigation into possible jury tampering charges. This is very sad. Powerful CEO's trying to avoid jail time by causing a mess. They have just proven that they are guilty by trying to taint the jury.
There is no way to prevent jury tampering.
They should have sequestered the jury from the get go. Thats usually how the stop them from tampering with the jury. I just watched "Runaway Jury" a week ago so I'm a little peeved about the entire Tyco proceedings. To me it's just another instance of the rich getting away with everything. If I were the judge I would keep them in there until this guy caves.
QUOTE(Rev_DelFuego @ Mar 29 2004, 02:58 PM)
This topic is inspired by the current Tyco trial. It appears that there is one juror, out of twelve, that has been tainted. At one point he's has even made the " " sign to the defense. Now if the jury has been tampered with, the only thing the judge can do is declare a mistrial. If this happens then the defendants walk, because it would be double jeopardy to try them again. I think (that means not sure) in order to get a retrial they would need to prove that the defense tampered with the jury.
Would you declare a mistrial?
Do we need to change the system so that jury tampering can be prevented?
" sign to the defense. Now if the jury has been tampered with, the only thing the judge can do is declare a mistrial. If this happens then the defendants walk, because it would be double jeopardy to try them again. I think (that means not sure) in order to get a retrial they would need to prove that the defense tampered with the jury. Would you declare a mistrial?
Do we need to change the system so that jury tampering can be prevented?
In a mistrial, double jeopardy doesn't necessarily attach, particularly in the case of a hung jury. Were a mistrial to be declared in this case, I doubt it would have jeopardy attached and they could start all over again if they wished.
I don't know what's going on in this case, I haven't followed it at all, but if they have a stubborn juror, the best thing to do is go ahead and start over again. That's how the system works, it's how it's supposed to work and it's how it should work.
QUOTE(Aquilla @ Mar 29 2004, 08:16 PM)
QUOTE(Rev_DelFuego @ Mar 29 2004, 02:58 PM)
This topic is inspired by the current Tyco trial. It appears that there is one juror, out of twelve, that has been tainted. At one point he's has even made the " " sign to the defense. Now if the jury has been tampered with, the only thing the judge can do is declare a mistrial. If this happens then the defendants walk, because it would be double jeopardy to try them again. I think (that means not sure) in order to get a retrial they would need to prove that the defense tampered with the jury.
Would you declare a mistrial?
Do we need to change the system so that jury tampering can be prevented?
" sign to the defense. Now if the jury has been tampered with, the only thing the judge can do is declare a mistrial. If this happens then the defendants walk, because it would be double jeopardy to try them again. I think (that means not sure) in order to get a retrial they would need to prove that the defense tampered with the jury. Would you declare a mistrial?
Do we need to change the system so that jury tampering can be prevented?
In a mistrial, double jeopardy doesn't necessarily attach, particularly in the case of a hung jury. Were a mistrial to be declared in this case, I doubt it would have jeopardy attached and they could start all over again if they wished.
I don't know what's going on in this case, I haven't followed it at all, but if they have a stubborn juror, the best thing to do is go ahead and start over again. That's how the system works, it's how it's supposed to work and it's how it should work.
Aquilla's right on target here.
A hung-jury mistrial would not in any way preclude the prosecution from re-filing the charges and starting the whole thing over. No double jeopardy ensues, because no valid, binding conclusion was reached by the jury.
The only real question is, is the cost involved in retrying the defendant cost effective to the crime? In this case, I would say it definitely is. Thank the current panel for their time and efforts, select a new jury, and have at 'em again.
What I heard is that Juror #4, a 79 year-old-woman is the one who the other jurors claim was not cooperating and thus the deliberations were "poisoned" and they wanted the judge to call for a mistrial. So, the judge sent the jurors home to cool off as he does not want a mistrial! Six months to get this far in this case! Mega bucks...but the defense team and Tyco tycoons would be elated!
This morning, the judge talked to each juror behind closed doors. Oh, and one of the reporters said that as juror #4 passed the defense's table, she made a signal resembling an O as in Okay. So, the judge talked privately with juror #4 and she assured him that she was agreeable and capable of continuing with the deliberations. Just as a side note...this juror #4 is 79 years old, many of her family members were or are lawyers. When she was 50-years-old, she went to college and got her law degree and practiced law until she retired. So...this lady is not ignorant about the law...but she certainly is acting strange. And I do wonder what that signal meant to the defense and why the judge would not censor that as no juror is to have outside verbal or otherwise contact with the case lawyers.
If those Tyco guys get off...that would be the second crime and tragic!
This morning, the judge talked to each juror behind closed doors. Oh, and one of the reporters said that as juror #4 passed the defense's table, she made a signal resembling an O as in Okay. So, the judge talked privately with juror #4 and she assured him that she was agreeable and capable of continuing with the deliberations. Just as a side note...this juror #4 is 79 years old, many of her family members were or are lawyers. When she was 50-years-old, she went to college and got her law degree and practiced law until she retired. So...this lady is not ignorant about the law...but she certainly is acting strange. And I do wonder what that signal meant to the defense and why the judge would not censor that as no juror is to have outside verbal or otherwise contact with the case lawyers.
If those Tyco guys get off...that would be the second crime and tragic!
After looking around a bit I found this from CNNMoney:
Well since this 79 year old woman is well versed in law, she should know better then to send signals to the lawyers. She is obviously trying to get this to a mistrial. Is that a crime? If the lawyers had gotten to her it would be jury tmpering, would it be the same if it was someone inside the jury as well?
QUOTE
"This is the biggest corporate misconduct case Robert Morgenthau has ever had. Even if there is a mistrial in the next trial, there would be a third trial. They're going to try this case to a verdict," Snyder said.
Well since this 79 year old woman is well versed in law, she should know better then to send signals to the lawyers. She is obviously trying to get this to a mistrial. Is that a crime? If the lawyers had gotten to her it would be jury tmpering, would it be the same if it was someone inside the jury as well?
If there were something improper happening inside the jury, it wouldn't be tampering, but rather juror misconduct. I'm not sure, but I think were something like that to happen, a juror acting improperly and violating the judge's instructions, the judge would be able to either declare a mistrial or possibily replace the offending juror with an alternate. If they get an alternate juror the jury has to start it's deliberations all over again.
QUOTE(Aquilla @ Mar 30 2004, 10:59 AM)
I'm not sure, but I think were something like that to happen, a juror acting improperly and violating the judge's instructions, the judge would be able to either declare a mistrial or possibily replace the offending juror with an alternate. If they get an alternate juror the jury has to start it's deliberations all over again.
In this case, once deliberations started, the alternate jurors were discharged and at least one has been giving interviews. Leaves only the "mistrial" option.
But the judge is letting them try again, which is probably a good thing and hard for the defense to claim that she was somehow biased AGAINST them if they return guilty verdicts.
The alternate juror that has been giving interviews? I heard him say that he can easily understand and appreciate why a few jurors may have a difficult time in finding the Tyco men guilty as charged because much of the evidence points to the fact that the Tyco board members were aware of and okayed much of their wild spending, etc. So, that might explain why the #4 juror, former lawyer, is holding out because she is going along with factual and actual evidence as presented. Yes, he is guilty...but the Tyco big whigs approved it! How would that not still make the Tyco men's actions and deeds a crime? 
Ending up to be a rather bizarre case with an O. J. shocking outcome...just hope we don't have a rerun!
Ending up to be a rather bizarre case with an O. J. shocking outcome...just hope we don't have a rerun!
BREAKING NEWS!!
Just saw on Fox News that the judge declared a mistrial in the Tyco ccase because of Juror #4. Looks like the Tyco buffons and their bribes to #4 was successful
I hope the prosecution decides to try these punks again and can build evidence to see if these idiots are guilty for jury tampering
Just saw on Fox News that the judge declared a mistrial in the Tyco ccase because of Juror #4. Looks like the Tyco buffons and their bribes to #4 was successful
I hope the prosecution decides to try these punks again and can build evidence to see if these idiots are guilty for jury tampering
QUOTE(GoAmerica @ Apr 2 2004, 12:38 PM)
BREAKING NEWS!!
Just saw on Fox News that the judge declared a mistrial in the Tyco ccase because of Juror #4. Looks like the Tyco buffons and their bribes to #4 was successful
Just saw on Fox News that the judge declared a mistrial in the Tyco ccase because of Juror #4. Looks like the Tyco buffons and their bribes to #4 was successful
Well, that supposition is surely misinformed!
The juror in question received a threatening letter. Thank the tabloids -- including the NY Post owned by the same folks as Fox -- for printing her name while the trial was still going on.
Clear jury tampering. The FBI will get involved. Yes, the buffoons will get retried, since it was 11-1 for conviction at last check.
Judge declared a mistrial due to pressure from outside sources on Juror #4. Now, other jurors are talking per the link to article below:
QUOTE
Judge declares Tyco mistrial
'Coercive letter' to juror prompts judge to end 6-month trial; ex-Tyco execs to face a new trial.
April 2, 2004: 5:44 PM EST
http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/02/news/midcaps/tyco_outcome/
'Coercive letter' to juror prompts judge to end 6-month trial; ex-Tyco execs to face a new trial.
April 2, 2004: 5:44 PM EST
http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/02/news/midcaps/tyco_outcome/
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.