Face to Face With Taking a Life

     The judge looked directly at me and said, “You are juror number twelve. Report in the outer room at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow.” I reacted with horror. How could this be? I thought I might be sick. I remember very little after that, except for wondering if I would need a bathroom to vomit. My overwhelming thought was “What have I done?”

     Several weeks prior to this scene, I had received the notice everyone dreads. I had been selected for jury service and would need to call a certain phone number the day before. It was possible I would not have to serve. I dialed the phone that night and learned I needed to report the next day.

     I arrived at the courthouse aware that I might still be excused. I took my seat among twenty or so other people. Soon a lady stood before us and explained that the case involved charges of first-degree murder. “Wow,” I thought. “This could be dramatic.” Soon the woman began calling names and telling us to seat ourselves in the front row of chairs, in the order that our name had been spoken. Mine was the eighth name called.

     Once all who those named were seated, she told the rest they could leave, but to call in again that night, as they might need to return the next day. She next turned to those of us in our assigned seats and informed us that eleven jurors were already selected, but a twelfth and two alternates were still needed. The judge and the attorneys would soon begin interviewing us to fill those spots. As I pondered seven people being in front of me, I felt relieved, thinking that surely three slots would be filled before they got to me.

     I had brought a book to read and settled in for the wait. Before long the person at the beginning of the row was called and went through a door. About twenty minutes passed, and the next person was called. So, it went for the next hour or so, and eventually they called the person next to me. I still thought I might escape and was sure that at most I would be an alternate.

     About a half hour later the door opened once more, and my name was called. I was mildly surprised to find myself in the courtroom, with the judge at his bench, and three other people sitting before him. All were wearing jackets and ties. I was told to sit in the witness chair, at the left hand of the judge. The judge introduced himself, and the prosecutor and the defense attorney, whom I recognized as a former client. The final person was the defendant, charged with first degree murder. He was a young Hispanic man, well-groomed and dressed. I was a bit unnerved with him facing me from about twelve feet away.

    After these brief introductions, the attorneys began to question me. One was “Do you know anyone in this courtroom?” I replied that ten years earlier I had treated horses belonging to the defense attorney. I thought this might excuse me. The judge asked if my relationship with the defense attorney would bias my ability to be objective, and I replied “No.” I was confident that was true. The judge told me that the trial would last at least a week, and asked if that would be a hardship for me. I answered that it would be very inconvenient, but not a hardship. (I was working for Cargill at the time and knew I would be paid my full salary. I would just have a lot of catching up to do after the trial.) The final question was the bombshell. Could I vote for the death penalty?

     I had given this question a lot of thought in the past, but only from a theoretical point of view. Now I was in the courtroom with the defendant right in front of me and looking right at me. I took a few moments for final consideration, and said “Under some circumstances, I could vote for the death penalty.” In my earlier pondering, I thought that some crimes were so heinous that justice could only be served though the execution of the offender. I still believe that.

     By now I was quite tense, wondering if I was going to be one of the alternates. Then came the judge’s words with which I began this story. All seven of the people interviewed before me were obviously excused. How had they answered the death sentence question? What factors kept them from being acceptable?

     The trial began the next morning, and by noon I was feeling relieved. The background information was that two rival gangs had encountered each other at a MacDonalds in Allentown. Members of one gang were in a car in the drive-through, when the three men from the other gang approached on foot. These three began firing bullets into the car with the other gang members, and then began running away down an adjacent alley. 

     It was dark, and headlights appeared behind them. One of the three assumed it was the other gang and shot at the car. The bullet hit and killed the driver, who was an eighteen-year-old girl who was out with a friend celebrating their high school graduation. They had nothing to do with either gang but were very much in the wrong place at the wrong time.

     The defendant was not the shooter, but he was a participant in the earlier scene of shooting at the rival gang’s car. Legally, if someone is killed during the commission of a crime, all who participated in that crime are guilty of murder. The defense argued that the defendant did not participate in the shooting in the alley. The prosecution contended that the alley shooting was a continuation of the shooting at MacDonalds, and thus the defendant was a part of the crime that killed the girl. This was essentially the issue that the jury had to decide.  All other information was accepted by both sides as true. My relief mentioned earlier was that I knew I would suffer no mental anguish over the death penalty, as in my mind it was clearly not justified in this case.

    The defendant was actually charged with first degree murder, third degree murder, and aggravated assault. Before the jury began deliberations, the judge explained the differences. He also explained that if we found for first-degree, we would also have to vote for the penalty, which would be either life in prison or execution. Eventually we found the defendant guilty of third-degree murder, which did not carry the option of the death penalty. The judge would impose the sentence later.

     Despite avoiding the pain of having to seriously consider whether a man would live or die, I was deeply impacted by this trial. The tragic impact this crime had on so many lives was, and still is, monumental. The loss of the life of the accidental victim will be felt by her family and friends for years. The psychological effect on the other girl, seeing her friend killed in front of her eyes, will be significant.

     Regarding the offenders, two of them were brothers. Their mother had to testify at one point, and I felt tremendous sadness for her. We learned that the shooter had pleaded guilty and had received a long prison sentence. Another life wasted. What is it about our culture that fosters the formation of gangs with such a propensity for violence and such low regard for humanity?

     Along with the emotional impact of this experience came other insights. When the jury first began deliberations, I asked permission to say a prayer. Everyone agreed; some enthusiastically. I think those of us who believe in prayer are sometimes too reluctant to offer it in public settings. 

     I was surprised at how little time the jury was actually in the courtroom hearing testimony. The trial lasted six days, and my estimate is that we spent seventy five percent of that time in the jury room, reading or doing puzzles or playing cards. My understanding was that the judge was either discussing issues with the attorneys, or attending matters not related to this trial.

     One more impression came from this experience. The three men involved with the shootings all had guns obtained illegally. Testimony revealed that guns are readily available “on the street” to whoever wants one. This causes me to wonder if gun control laws will ever make any difference unless they truly dry up the supply of weapons. It seems to me that the people who are likely to commit crimes with guns will not pay much attention to gun control laws.