Ever been called for jury duty? A high school librarian was called to a jury panel in Tennessee in an attempted murder trial. When questioned, it turned out she knew the victim -- he'd been a student worker in her library years ago. Ms Baumgardner, the librarian, said she had not seen Mays (the victim) in a long time, that she liked most of the students who had worked for her, but she couldn't say if she liked him any more than her other students. She said her relationship with him would not "get in the way" of the trial and that she could be fair.
The defense moved to strike Baumgardner for cause based upon her "personal relationship" with the victim. The trial court did not allow the defense to remove her for cause, however, and the defense had to use one of its limited number of peremptory challenges to take her off the jury.
The state appellate court upheld the lower court - the defense could not remove her for cause. The appellate court noted that Baumgardner testified that she could be fair, even though the victim was her former student.
Minow take: I've served as a juror on three cases - and believe that librarians, as a whole, make excellent jurors, interested in the facts and not generally swayed by innuendo or subjective beliefs. Even so, it's a little odd that the court could allow someone on a jury who had personally known the victim.
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JEREMY TUCKER DAVIS,
2004 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 1006, ALIAS JERRY TUCKER DAVIS, No. E2003-02214-CCA-R3-CD, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE, AT KNOXVILLE, 2004 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 1006, June 15, 2004, Argued, November 15, 2004, Filed
From the case:
During voir dire, the trial court asked the prospective jurors if any of them knew the parties involved in the case or knew of any reason why they could not be impartial. Juror Baumgardner told the trial court that the victim was her former student. Upon further questioning by the state, Ms. Baumgardner said that she had been a librarian at East Ridge High School for many years and that the victim had worked for her in the library. Upon questioning by the defendant, Ms. Baumgardner said that she had liked most of the students who had worked for her, that she could not say she had liked the victim more than her other students, that she had not seen the victim in a long time, and that she had read in the newspaper about his being shot. Ms. Baumgardner also stated that she could be fair and that her relationship with the victim would not "get in the way" of the trial. The defense moved to strike Ms. Baumgardner for cause based upon her "personal relationship" with the victim. The trial court stated that it did not believe Ms. Baumgardner and the victim had a personal relationship and refused to strike her from the panel. Later, a peremptory challenge was used to dismiss Ms. Baumgardner from the jury.
We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to excuse Ms. Baumgardner for cause. Ms. Baumgardner testified that although the victim was her former student, she could be fair. Moreover, although the defendant may have had to use a peremptory challenge to remove her and may have exhausted all of his peremptory challenges, he has failed to make any showing that his having to use a peremptory challenge to strike her from the panel resulted in an incompetent juror serving on the jury.
Comments