Wrongful Convictions

Want to Help Fight Wrongful Convictions? Sit on a Jury!

Not a month goes by that I don’t receive a phone call from some family member, friend, or friend of a family member, or family member of a friend, asking “What’s the best way to get out of jury service?” With about the same or similar frequency I get asked “I see that you are involved in fighting wrongful convictions. How can I get involved?” I publish this article in the hope of getting folks to see how the two questions are connected.

When I get the jury service question, I usually ask why they don’t want to sit. Inevitably, the responses are that they are too busy, too involved in work, have a vacation planned. Such callers are usually then put through a mini-lecture on my part about the importance of serving on a jury and the importance of having open-minded, well-read and justice-minded individuals sitting on a jury panel. Certainly, they can ask the jury clerk to postpone their service to a more convenient time. That request is almost universally granted so that most excuses can be put aside. These callers are usually also fans of law-related shows (which I never watch) like CSI, Law & Order, or the true crime shows like Dateline or American Crime Story. Why not sit on a real mystery instead and see how law is actually dispensed in this country? I then give them a shortened version of my jury questioning in criminal trials, a process I call “Recapture the Flag.” In picking criminal trials, prosecutors often get to wear a badge of honor as upholders of the law. They are viewed by jurors as allies of the court and law enforcement so that the jury is often left with the impression that the ADA is protecting our American way of life and all that stands between us and anarchy. Defense counsel on the other hand, is recognized as a necessary evil whose job is to get their guilty client off by any means necessary including lying, cheating and stealing. I try to shift that dynamic by usually asking the question “Why are our servicemen and women fighting abroad?” Inevitably a juror will answer “To Protect our freedoms” I follow up with “And what are those freedoms exactly?” Inevitably, a juror or two will rattle off the First Amendment freedoms – speech, exercise and non/establishment of religion, the press, assembly etc. The Second Amendment is also usually shouted out. My follow up: “What about the Sixth Amendment?” “Are our armed forces also fighting and serving to support the Fifth Amendment?” “Are those rights and freedoms any less important than the ones you mentioned” It opens up a dialogue about my role that yes of course I am representing and defending the individual on trial but I am also defending those rights as well – and so are jurors. Just like the men and women in uniform though of course at much less a cost and sacrifice, jurors protect and defend our freedoms. I have found it a very successful way to get jurors beyond paying lip service to the Presumption of Innocence, Burden of Proof and the Right to Remain Silent.

Letters, I get letters
This picture is of one month’s request for help from incarcerated men eager to have their cases reviewed. I read each one personally and respond to each person. If a case is worthy of further review, I open a file and begin the process of looking into the case. Could I use help in the process? Have I sent out a few letters to others asking for them to help and follow up? Of course. But it is a time-consuming, frustrating , lengthy process. Think carefully before getting involved. You can have a more immediate and direct impact by serving on a jury and doing the service properly.

There are many causes to wrongful conviction – bad defense lawyering; overzealous prosecutors; biased police officers; sloppy and incomplete investigation; false confessions; faulty eyewitnesses and forensic evidence, etc etc. While stories of these tragedies and miscarriages of justice are prominent these days, when it comes time to try a criminal case, folks seem to cast aside the flaws in our criminal justice system and swallow whole what is portrayed before them by the prosecution. The system needs jurors to sit on criminal trials who are open-minded and will question the evidence presented. The system requires jurors who will hold the government to its high burden of proof and embrace the presumption of innocence and the right to remain silent. To recognize that the defense lawyer is upholding valuable rights fundamental to our society and revered by our Founding Fathers. Our system of justice is one of the greatest in the world. And by a very large margin – it gets things right. But because of the number of prosecutions and because of the systemic flaws listed above, injustices occur in significant numbers as well. The best way to fight wrongful convictions is to not have the conviction occur in the first place. And remember that a person being found guilty under the law and the facts is not wrongfully convicted either.

So please, next time you get that jury notice in the mail. Don’t call me. Serve. Make the time. Do your civic duty. Uphold the Constitution. One of the best things about jury service is that if you do it right, fairly and in proper application of the law, you defend the Constitution and perform a public service regardless of your verdict. And now to that you can add that you also help fight against wrongful convictions. Welcome to the club!

8 replies on “Want to Help Fight Wrongful Convictions? Sit on a Jury!”

My problem with jury service is not having all evidence presented, either because prosecutors withheld or defense attorneys (not you!) don’t work zealously for clients. Then there are informants who get “sweetheart” deals from prosecutors in exchange for their perjury–this has happened even with relatives of an accused. I would hate to be on a jury that doesn’t get all the facts and all the evidence.

Goria, one of the weirder and stupidest excuses for why someone has a “problem” with jury duty I’ve ever heard.

I don’t understand this. You don’t want to do jury service out of some fear of getting it “wrong” ? Because the lawyers involved are corrupt and/or lazy.

Do you think the defendant won’t be processed through the system and case disposed of without you. That the system is so broken that a defendant is better off if fair minded people refuse to participate ? You prefer people that don’t care if they might get it “wrong” to comprise the jury ?

I agree that it’s an enormous burden to pass judgement on someone. I’m not telling you anything you don’t know but all you can do is your best to fairly evaluate the evidence presented to you. The rest is not something in the role of a juror that you can control or be responsible for.

Thank you for this MY HUSBAND PAID HIS LAWYER 700.00 a,week in 2002 THEN WHEN the Money ran out they railroaded my husband he’s been locked up for A WRONGFUL CONVICTION for 15 years I found out through a Lawyer THAT one of my husbands cases was dropped NO ONE told us this A Houston sherriff finally sent my husband a,Letter TELLING him his case was dropped WE ARE FIGHTING KNOW to get a LAWYER to get my husband out of prison NOONE WILL HELP US .It’s NO easy other ESPECIALLY WHEN NO ONE WILL LISTEN .

This column perpetuates the TV version of our legal system whereby people are arrested, presumed innocent and then defended by skilled counsel at a trial where the Govt. must prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It sounds very nice.

This is so rare an occurrence that it borders on propaganda. What actually happens is one gets arrested, typically over-charged, indicted by a Grand Jury (in a state such as NY which uses the Grand Jury or a prelim hearing if elsewhere) in a bizarre process whereby the prosecutor simultaneously acts as the arm of the State making a presentation with the goal of obtaining an indictment as well as the “legal advisor” to the Grand Jury (a situation that is so manifestly a conflict of interest you wonder how any lawyer can possibly perform the two functions with a straight face). Once indicted which is a near inevitable result (except in the case of police officers in which case there is virtually no chance of an indictment) the defendant will be offered a plea bargain along the lines of you can go to trial and risk 20x time in jail or you can plead guilty and get x time. And so almost every case is plead out. This is how criminal cases are disposed of in the USA. The criminal trial a very, very rare bird. So much so that one should be downright honored to serve if given the chance but not surprised when and if they are dismissed before rendering a verdict.

Actually this column explains why the criminal justice system is NOT like TV justice and why it needs people to get involved. With the volume of arrests and prosecutions juries are still trying cases every day in every county in the Metropolitan NYC area. I do agree that jurors should be honored to serve

“… juries are still trying cases every day in every county in the Metropolitan NYC area. ”

And completely besides the point and to present it as you imply as the norm rather than the EXTREME exception to the rule which is indictment and plea bargain is, again, to present a TV show version of our legal system.

Leave a Reply to Samuel Jaded Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.