Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
A Look Inside The Bridgegate Jury Room...
from two of the jurors. A highly publicized trial is an interesting event. EVERYBODY knows or at least they think they know what the outcome should be. It has the feel of a sporting event with people taking sides. Lost is the right to a fair trial for the defendants. They deserve a fair and impartial hearing as much as anyone else-and as much as can be given when there is a great deal of pre-trial publicity. The jury, in these cases, is shielded from much of the fanfare and hoopla that accompany a trial of this nature. They sit day after day and listen to the witnesses, the attorneys and the judge. They deliberate, in secret, among themselves at the conclusion of the case and bear a great deal of personal responsibility for the outcome. That's a pretty big burden. Most of the time we have no idea what took place. It isn't like 12 Angry Men where you get to follow the progress of the deliberations. However, two of the Bridgegate jurors have spoken with the press and it is both fascinating and reassuring.
Here is a compelling account from one of the jurors:
Tears, doubts, heated debate in Bridgegate jury room
Emotional arguments, tears, and heated exchanges characterized much of the jury deliberations in the George Washington Bridge lane closure case, according to a Morris County man who sat on the jury that listened to the case for six weeks and deliberated over another five days.
The man, who wished to be identified only as Juror 10, said that the debate among the five men and seven women was so heated that the jury had to be sent home early on Wednesday, the second full day of deliberations.
When they returned their verdict Friday morning, the jury found Bridget Anne Kelly and Bill Baroni guilty on all counts of conspiracy, fraud and civil rights charges. The pair, both 44 years old, face a maximum of 20 years in prison.
“It was very hard,” the juror said. “Thinking about somebody going to jail.”
The man, who had no idea of the possible sentence awaiting the pair, added: “I think they were both very nice people, but I just tried to do the best I could as an honest and a fair juror.”
Jurors began deliberating on Monday afternoon following six weeks of testimony involving 35 witnesses and hundreds of text messages, emails, documents, audio and video clips.
Initially, the juror said that he and his colleagues were split roughly eight to four in favor of convicting Kelly and Baroni. Although several jurors were adamant that the defendants were guilty, the juror said most kept an open mind until the final day of deliberations.
“We had an agreement that anyone, at any time, could change their vote,” the man said.
Deliberations began around 3 p.m. on Monday after the prosecution concluded its closing arguments. Because the jury had so much information to process, the man said that apart from selecting a foreman, jurors decided not to begin deliberating until they had given themselves an evening to mull over the case.
Tuesday, the first full day of deliberations, was very difficult, the juror said. He declined to provide details, but he said that “things got testy” and that he personally felt as though he was suffering from “information overload.” Several jurors were in tears, he said.
Emotional arguments, tears, and heated exchanges characterized much of the jury deliberations in the George Washington Bridge lane closure case, according to a Morris County man who sat on the jury that listened to the case for six weeks and deliberated over another five days.
The man, who wished to be identified only as Juror 10, said that the debate among the five men and seven women was so heated that the jury had to be sent home early on Wednesday, the second full day of deliberations.
When they returned their verdict Friday morning, the jury found Bridget Anne Kelly and Bill Baroni guilty on all counts of conspiracy, fraud and civil rights charges. The pair, both 44 years old, face a maximum of 20 years in prison.
“It was very hard,” the juror said. “Thinking about somebody going to jail.”
The man, who had no idea of the possible sentence awaiting the pair, added: “I think they were both very nice people, but I just tried to do the best I could as an honest and a fair juror.”
Jurors began deliberating on Monday afternoon following six weeks of testimony involving 35 witnesses and hundreds of text messages, emails, documents, audio and video clips.
Initially, the juror said that he and his colleagues were split roughly eight to four in favor of convicting Kelly and Baroni. Although several jurors were adamant that the defendants were guilty, the juror said most kept an open mind until the final day of deliberations.
“We had an agreement that anyone, at any time, could change their vote,” the man said.
Deliberations began around 3 p.m. on Monday after the prosecution concluded its closing arguments. Because the jury had so much information to process, the man said that apart from selecting a foreman, jurors decided not to begin deliberating until they had given themselves an evening to mull over the case.
Tuesday, the first full day of deliberations, was very difficult, the juror said. He declined to provide details, but he said that “things got testy” and that he personally felt as though he was suffering from “information overload.” Several jurors were in tears, he said.
Read the rest here: http://www.northjersey.com/news/tears-doubts-heated-debate-in-bridgegate-jury-room-1.1688069?page=all
It really shows the emotion and careful thought that goes into deciding a criminal case. It also shows that this case was not an easy one-despite the overwhelming evidence. They seemed like nice people. There wasn't any personal gain from these events like a politician taking a bribe. And-where was Chris Christie? Well, the jury wanted to know too. Here is a second account from a juror who felt the esteemed governor of New Jersey needed to be on trial as well:
Bridgegate juror: Christie should have been on trial
A juror who helped convict Bill Baroni and Bridget Anne Kelly in the seven-week Bridgegate trial told NJ Advance Media Friday night Gov. Chris Christie should have been one of the defendants in the case.
Virginia Huffman, 50, of Chatham, made the explosive statement in an interview outside her home. Huffman, who had been in a news blackout throughout the trial, was finally able to look at coverage after the jury announced its verdict late Friday morning.
Huffman said she was "appalled" by a written statement Christie released in the hours after the verdict.
In the statement, Christie said he was "saddened" that Kelly, his former deputy chief of staff, and Baroni, a close ally and top official at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, showed "a lack of respect for the appropriate role of government and for the people we serve."
Christie also reiterated he knew nothing about the lane closures at the George Washington Bridge in 2013 before or during the operation, a claim contradicted at trial by several witnesses.
Huffman said she did not believe Baroni and Kelly, both 44, were scapegoats, because the term implies they were innocent. The evidence supported a verdict of guilty, she said.
But Huffman called the two "sacrificial lambs" for a larger corrupt group of government officials.
A juror who helped convict Bill Baroni and Bridget Anne Kelly in the seven-week Bridgegate trial told NJ Advance Media Friday night Gov. Chris Christie should have been one of the defendants in the case.
Virginia Huffman, 50, of Chatham, made the explosive statement in an interview outside her home. Huffman, who had been in a news blackout throughout the trial, was finally able to look at coverage after the jury announced its verdict late Friday morning.
Huffman said she was "appalled" by a written statement Christie released in the hours after the verdict.
In the statement, Christie said he was "saddened" that Kelly, his former deputy chief of staff, and Baroni, a close ally and top official at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, showed "a lack of respect for the appropriate role of government and for the people we serve."
Christie also reiterated he knew nothing about the lane closures at the George Washington Bridge in 2013 before or during the operation, a claim contradicted at trial by several witnesses.
Huffman said she did not believe Baroni and Kelly, both 44, were scapegoats, because the term implies they were innocent. The evidence supported a verdict of guilty, she said.
But Huffman called the two "sacrificial lambs" for a larger corrupt group of government officials.
read the rest here: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2016/11/bridgegate_juror_christie_should_have_been_on_tria.html
It's pretty reassuring to see that ordinary people take their responsibilities so seriously. It is also comforting to know that they could come to some very sensible conclusions. Kelly and Baroni were people who lost their way because of ambition and took a couple of steps over the line of decent behavior in pursuit of the fame and glory of Chris Christie. They need to answer for that. Now it appears that they will lose their freedom as well. It is also pretty clear that the person who needs to answer more than anyone has so far escaped responsibility. Chris Christie needs to be held accountable. It was clear to the jurors who sat through this trial. Let's hope its clear to the US Attorney's Office.
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
