May 24, 2013

• Jodi Aries Jury Split 8/4

  I heard an unsubstantiated repost that the jury in the Jodi Aries case was split 8-to-4 in favor of the death penalty and was, therefore, hung.  I think that with a split that large, they actually brought back a 'no death' verdict, and the prosecutor should negotiate a deal for life without parole rather than spend all the money to empanel another jury and put the victim's family through all this again.  8-to-4 is, after all, a pretty big split.  That means that a third of the jury was not convinced by his argument.  A hugh deficit to overcome.

  Why was the split so big?  I can't say for certain, because so far the jury is not talking, but several possibilities come to mind.  First, those opposed to the death penalty may simply have felt that the prosecutor just didn't convince them that the murder was really premeditated.  Second, some one or more of the jurors was actually morally opposed to the death penalty and lied about their ability to impose the death sentence just so they could get on the jury and impede the process or prevent an execution.  If so, that would be a prosecutable offense if it can be proven.  A third possibility might be that at least one of the jurors was an anarchist dedicated to interfering with the government and its processes regardless of what the issue might be.  Given that the jury was also split 7-to-5 on the 1st degree murder conviction, it seems to me that maybe the split on the penalty phase was a combination of the above reasons.

  Now, the media seems to be hung up on the idea that four people refused to budge off of their position against sentencing Jodi to die.  I should point out that one could just as easily say that eight people absolutely refused to move off their position to see Jodi executed.  They might be accused of being too hungry for blood.  

  • 7:20 am
  • 3 Comments