How About Screening Jurors
We're willing to bet that the defense knew precisely what they were doing by leaving a juror in place with a felony convictions:
- Court officials acknowledge that information revealed by the Tribune appears to show that a member of the federal jury that convicted Springfield power broker William Cellini concealed two felony convictions.
Attorneys for Cellini said the information may be used in seeking to overturn last week's verdict.
But leaving the juror in place gives them perfect grounds for a vacated verdict and a retrial. And with the amount of money spent of private attorneys, we're sure that they were steps ahead of the state in doing background checks for jurors.
Labels: silly people
posted by SCC at 12:01 AM
31 Comments:
In a high profile criminal case why don't they run a criminal history check on jurors? This would be legal. Make sure that person does not have a criminal backround.
"Da fix is in"
well this is easily fixable right? Just don't release the jurors names to the press in high profile case and then there will be no embarrassment.
This whole thing stinks. First, why isn't anything happening to the juror who lied to the judge during questioning?
And, what made the Tribune decide to just somehow review the backgrounds of the jurors? Did they do that after the Blago case? Or any other cases?
Maybe somebody told them exactly where to look, and what to look for. After all, it seems more like "oh look what we accidentally found" for the newspaper to be saying this, rather then Cellini's scumbag lawyers to just come out and say it.
This city, county, and state suck. To think I was living elsewhere for a number of years, and stupidly moved back here...
Gee, if there is a mistrial now, the defense team will know the prosecution's entire strategy. I wonder if that would be helpful in a retrial...? *wink wink*
I guess if this corrupt MFer is found guilty, the next step would be to start looking at all of the politicians who got wealthy over the years by taking bribes from this scum. Who knows, it might go all the way to Obama!
YIKES! We can't have that, now, can we?
Is it just me, or does this Cellini character have one of the worst hairpieces in history?
Every time I see this evil clown on TV, I tell my wife, "Hey look, there's the guy with the dead cat on his head!"
Left the juror on for the same reason they pulled the wiretap on Blago.
How come nobody looked into the jury who let the piece of crap go after he shot two CPD officers this summer?
Why do we not now anything about them? I am more worried about that then some connected stroke who was trying to get more money for another connected stroke.
I had a gun case in federal court many yrs ago. Kid had a full auto mac10. Kid was connected and had a pro bono high profile lawyer. I knew the case was in trouble when I looked over at the judge during testimony and saw her writting checks for her utility bills. Then came the big one. He won the case on appeal because the court clerk miss scheduled the case and it was overturned on the speedy trial rule. There's always a way for "Da Fix"
So what.. he was being tried by a "jury of his piers."
It is nearly impossible to overturn a jury decision . It will not happen. No conspiracy here, no fix, just a juror who seems to either have lied outright or was confused by the questions. The newwspaper did the same thing in the Ryan case and I am sure in others.
Screened by The Combine. This Jury pool was designed to have this stoolie. It's The Chicago Way. With Blago being sentenced soon, Cellini doesn't want any jail time.
Another delay for both cases.
Meanwhile, Shortshanks sweating bullets.
Anonymous said...
well this is easily fixable right? Just don't release the jurors names to the press in high profile case and then there will be no embarrassment.
11/12/2011 01:38:00 AM
***********************************
Sounds good, but too manyFirst Amemdment problems.
Since the Blago case the Fed allows criminal background checks on jurors...BUT the final call on this is left up to the Judge hearing the case who didn't want to do it.
If the Tribune didn't nose around no one would. You think the Scum-Times would? The Penny Saver doesn't have the manpower to do it and the Hairspray people are too busy discovering Chicago extends west of Halstead and South of Roosevelt.
You're saying the private defense lawyers had access to information about the juror that the federal government did not have?
That makes no sense whatsoever. That is not how jury selection works in federal court, or state court for that matter.
The juror lied; Cellini, like any defendant, is entitled to honest jurors who follow the law, so he should get a new trial.
Jesus wept.
Who was the Attorney speaking on behalf of Cellini...
None other that notorious weasel...
Danny Webb.
If I were the judge, I would ask Mr. Web...
When did you, or when did your staff become aware of this matter involving this juror?
If it could be proved that he, or his staff knew before or during the trial I would love to see him disbarred or at least suspended from law practice.
It will not be easy to throw out the guilty verdict Read this
But the U.S. Attorney’s Office released a statement saying that jurors convicted of felonies are not automatically disqualified from serving on juries.
“Under Illinois law, civil rights are automatically restored upon the ‘completion of any sentence of imprisonment or upon discharge from probation, conditional discharge or periodic imprisonment.’ Thus, a person who has completed his or her sentence on a felony conviction is not disqualified from serving on a federal jury,” the statement said.
Former prosecutor Phil Turner said he’s seen “unbelievable things” revealed about jurors after conviction, including that a juror had gone to school with a prosecutor, or considered information they’re not supposed to consider — and the conviction stays.
“Unfortunately, the way the law is, especially in the 7th Circuit, it doesn’t give the defendant any relief. The courts go to great lengths to sustain jury verdicts,” Turner, a defense lawyer, said.
“It has to be something extremely, extremely severe. Even if the government withholds exculpatory
It was a jury of his peers.
It seems to me that the Cook County Sheriff's Office should name check all perspective jurrors before sending out the jury duty summons. This would ensure that no felons or other criminals sit on any jury. It would also simplify the screening process.
Even a last in john marshall graduating class ASA knows to run background checks on jurors. Guess even Ausa spots are clouted with the best of the best.
DAN WEBB the sleeze bag.
What do you want to bet that the Def Att knew?
And, what made the Tribune decide to just somehow review the backgrounds of the jurors? Did they do that after the Blago case? Or any other cases?
11/12/2011 02:11:00 AM
Yes, they generally do for high profile cases. There was a lot of stuff after Blago's first trial about the lone holdout who hung the jury on most of the counts. I'm going to guess they didn't actually run any kind of extensive search, the felony convictions were likely easily found, which is even more embarrassing for the prosecutors
In a high profile criminal case why don't they run a criminal history check on jurors? This would be legal. Make sure that person does not have a criminal background.
I agree. In future elections, "we" should demand this. Perhaps, "they" didn't know SQL or MySQL, for database queries.
You're saying the private defense lawyers had access to information about the juror that the federal government did not have?
That makes no sense whatsoever. That is not how jury selection works in federal court, or state court for that matter.
The juror lied; Cellini, like any defendant, is entitled to honest jurors who follow the law, so he should get a new trial.
11/12/2011 11:29:00 AM
Mr. Webb, shouldn't you be on the "Lying, Cheating, Suborning Perjury" website. I'm sure they have one for 'your' types.
Article in FOP Newsletter 2011
A True Jury of your Peers?
There was a recent court case at 26th and California involving a convicted felon who shot two police officers during the lawful execution of a search warrant. This convicted felon discharged his pistol numerous times through a closed bedroom door striking two Narcotics officers who entered and began clearing the apartment prior to searching. The offender showed no regard for the lives of the Police Officers, the children or the other people in the apartment that were present during the execution of this Search Warrant. Now any reasonable person should believe that this career convicted felon is guilty of attempted murder of a police officer, attempted murder, aggravated battery, aggravated discharge of a firearm, Felony UUW or a host of other charges that could be levied against this career criminal. You would think that this case was a slam dunk and the trial was just a formality. After all, two police officers shot during the lawful execution of a search warrant by a career convicted felon, at least Aggravated Battery and Felony UUW are a slam dunk, right. Guess Again! The Monday morning quarterbacks who did not spend one minute at the trial blamed the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office and ASA’s who presented the case that resulted in a Not Guilty verdict. This was a jury trial where the jury decides guilt or innocence. I personally spoke to one of the involved officers and asked him about the ASA’s prosecution of this offender. His response, “Jimmy if I had to do it all over again I wouldn’t change a thing”. He went on to tell me that the ASA’s did great job presenting the evidence as well as presenting the closing arguments. He went on about the ASA’s professionalism, preparation and dedication to their job and could not say enough about the quality of their prosecution. So now you’re wondering what happened, just as I did after hearing this. He went on to explain that this defendant had a true jury of HIS PEERS. They didn’t find this defendant guilty of any of the charges against him. Not even Aggravated Discharge or Felony UUW. That’s what happens when a career convicted felon gets a true jury of His Peers. The lesson here is that we often get subpoenaed for jury duty as do our family members, friends and relatives. The majority of us do not want to be bothered with jury duty and guess who ends up being the biggest representative of the jury pool? A jury of HIS PEERS. We encourage our families and friends to call their representatives concerning legislation that affects our lives, our profession and our family. We also need to encourage our family and friends to participate, when called for jury duty, so the jury pool has some God Fearing, Law Abiding, Tax Paying jurors that will enable the courts to select a true cross section of society so that the victim and the defendant get a fair trial. Imagine, if your family member was accused of a totally false allegation, is charged with this crime wrongfully and the jury pool does not include any God Fearing, Law Abiding, Tax Paying potential jurors. Please help the police officer you are related to by being a juror. We really need your help!
This was suggested several times, to the locals and also the feds. It would have created a light duty spot for some injured PO, so the bosses killed the idea.
How about background checks, wtf
Another excuse to delay the BLAGO sentencing hearing!
"Article in FOP Newsletter 2011
A True Jury of your Peers?
There was a recent court case at 26th and California involving a convicted felon who shot two police officers during the lawful execution of a search warrant. ..."
Thank you for this post. It is right on, and everyone on this blog and every law abiding citizen should read it before they try to get out of jury service.
I don't know about federal criminal cases, but criminal background checks are done for every jury trial in Cook County. However, the only way to excuse a juror for an arrest or conviction is if they are asked and lie about it. If they admit it, the state will have to use a peremptory challenge. (And risk a racial-bias claim from the defense) The juror who admits to the arrest/conviction will not likely be excused for cause.
Post a Comment
<< Home