Mike Benedetti over at PieandCoffee.org has done a really commendable job of covering the Larry Cirignano case from beginning until end. Now, he has an interview with an anonymous juror from the trial–the one who claims to have been the lone dissenting voice in the jury room. This is some real “12 Angry Men” stuff; just a fantastic view inside the process.
Basically the judge rejected the hung jury verdict. So I come back in–and they weren’t very happy with me in the first place, cause a lot of them wanted to get in and out on Friday, quite a few of them. So at that point the atmosphere started to get hostile- ”hostile” is not the correct word, but more confrontational. Like they were clearly upset with me at that point. Cause they wanted to have the day free, they wanted to get out of there, a lot of them didn’t work, quite a few of them were retired on the jury. They just wanted to spend the day not working, they just wanted to get out of there and spend the day doing what they wanted to do: fishing, spending the day with their kids or grandkids. So they clearly weren’t happy with me at that point. It was a tough situation to be in.
After that experience–I didn’t know how long it would take to be a hung jury, and to go alone against five other people, it’s a really tough experience to describe, and you really have to have a sort of indifference to your fellow man in order to keep on fighting against the current. I mean, I think you really have to be autistic or sociopathic.
The juror says that the big debate was the definition of assault and battery, despite the fact that the judge printed up a definition.
I believe the components were: did he touch the victim, did he intend to touch her, did he have any right or excuse to touch her, and was it without her consent or could it lead to bodily harm. And I thought that fulfilled, his actions fulfilled every component of that. And so by the law, I felt he should be guilty. Some of my fellow jury members also felt that yes, he did fulfill every component of that, but they didn’t agree that was assault and battery. They thought assault and battery was when the victim ends up bloody, or beaten, or with a black eye.
It’s a fairly long interview, but definitely worth a read. Great job, Mike.