I just finished serving on a meth trial. Being a lefty, I was rooting

[brewens]

for the defense attorney in a way. I'm the first one to want to give a kid a chance, hoping it wasn't really his. Unfortunately it pretty much had to be. The defense didn't have much to work with.

We were told the kid was on parole or probation to begin with. His first mistake was being with another kid in the same boat. Then they were spotted by a narcotics officer, girl at the window of the car in a parking lot. That got them followed after the girl walked down the street. Then the kid evidently didn't know what turn signals were for. The narc called a patrol vehicle and alerted him to be on the lookout for the car.

The patrol cop spots them and sees him fail to signal again and pulls him over. He determines that he has two parolees and calls in a parole/probation officer. We were only told the defendant was on parole or probation. That gets another cop with a drug dog called in. The dog alerts and that sets off a full search. They find four 1/2 gram bags of meth stashed along side the fuse panel. Also a pipe, syringes, a container of empty bags and an empty bag with residue on the floor. Then one of the clinchers for the distribution charges, a set of scales in the trunk.

Extenuating circumstances were that the car was owned by the halfway house operated by a local church. Other people did have access to the car but the kid was it's primary operator. That gave the defense a prayer of trying to deflect the possession at least. Had it not been for the scales and had the bags been stashed on the passenger side, under the seat or something, that may have been enough. We could then maybe have bought the passenger being responsible for all of it.

In any case, it turned out to be the kids second meth and third overall felony conviction. That made us all feel a little better, finding that out. For Idaho, you would have wanted that jury if you were on trial. The cops made a few mistakes. The kid could have been guilty and walked if the defense had just a little stronger case.

[ret5hd]

1. i dunno. a set of scales warrants a distribution charge?

what if the scales was to make sure you didn't get ripped off?

If the cops made mistakes, let them go.

i'm a big believer in jury nullification.

[sabrina 1]

3. Me too, re jury nullification I mean. That is a very good tool in ending the drug war.

If he was driving dangerously and that was one of the charges, the jury could go along with that, but on the drug charges, I agree, don't convict. You do have a right to judge the law.

[brewens]

6. Scales, four 1/2 gram bags weighed up, a container of empty bags all points to

distribution. Empty new little bags identical to what the meth was in. Sure, he could be a user that bought it that way but being an old stoner, I knew better than to do that. Even if we were wrong somehow, no one made him go out like that. Being on parole and all, WTF did he THINK was gonna happen if he got pulled over?

The mistakes the cops made were more like things the defense would have liked to have seen done, if they turned out in the kids favor. A clean urinalysis and only the passengers prints on the stuff would have helped.

[ret5hd]

13. you are a cop.

[twins.fan]

2. I guess you found him guilty. Three felonies. That is pretty serious. How old was he?

[brewens]

8. He's about 25 I think. n/t

[Warpy]

28. You might have done the poor kid a favor.

A lot of addicts say the only way they ever got clean was being locked up and bored enough to attend NA meetings in prison.

Meth is particularly hard to beat. It changes brain chemistry to the point that a lot of recovering addicts will need to be on antidepressants for the rest of their lives. If this kid got caught early enough, maybe he's got a chance. It's up to him to take it, though.

[1StrongBlackMan]

4. Don't feel too bad ...

We were told the kid was on parole or probation to begin with. His first mistake was being with another kid in the same boat.

If both the kids weren't residents of the halfway house AND on legitimate business (e.g., headed to or from work, on an errand for the house, on a house approved day trip), the kid will likely be going, or going back, on a PV ... even without a conviction.

[brewens]

9. The other kid was from another town where the defendant was convicted of the previous meth

charge. So they evidently hooked up for the purpose of using/dealing. Exactly what not to do if you are out on parole and serious about staying free.

[1StrongBlackMan]

33. Yep ...

Unless you want to go/go back to jail.

[Care Acutely]

14. Meth is still illegal. OP did the right thing under the law and

the right thing in general.

As a psych nurse, I get to deal with a lot of meth aftermath. Whole families blown to bits emotionally, physically, financially and so on. I'm fine as hell with it being illegal.

I'd rather everyone who uses got treatment instead of jail, but it is what it is. Hell - we can't even talk the country into making sure everyone is covered for dental care, accidents and cancer - so addiction and behavioral health for people who commit crimes is, forgive the pun, a pipe dream at this point.

Treatment is ideal, but short of the ideal, I want the dealers removed from the open market.

[Nevilledog]

22. Lack of knowledge about sentencing guidelines are the norm

I'm a defense attorney in AZ. These convictions would result in a minimum 10 year FLAT time prison sentence and that sentence would be run after the prison sentence for the probation case. Juries are instructed by the judge to not consider possible punishment yet most jurors have no clue what the actual punishment is and erroneously believe that a judge has total discretion as to punishment. Most states now have sentencing enhancements filed at the discretion of the prosecutor which take the option of probation off the table depending on the charges.

In AZ a first time offender, totally clean record, charged with possession for sale of meth (doesn't matter how much meth) is not probation eligible and the minimum that person can receive is 5 years flat in prison.....probation is not available. Some counties will plead the case to an attempt so a person can get probation, but not in our county. They will only give a probation eligible plea if the person agrees to work as a snitch. It's a nightmare to deal will as a defense attorney.

[yawnmaster]

26. Sounds like AZ is not a meth friendly state. eom

[pipoman]

5. Most people don't get that

almost every criminal case turns on minutia. The difference between an average lawyer and a great lawyer is attention to tiny details throughout the case. Most lawyers simply don't have the time or inclination to turn over every stone. Those who do often find that morsel you needed to acquit.

[slackmaster]

7. I have served on a criminal case, multiple commercial burglaries (Dept. of Motor Vehicles offices)

It took some deliberation to get the jury to agree on everything - One older lady was adamant that we should convict on a degree issue for which there just wasn't evidence. She finally backed down.

After the trial the prosecutor filled us in on the defendant's criminal history - It was extensive, though all non-violent.

He got nine years, but died in prison of complications from injuries he received in a fight.

Serving on a trial jury can be a real eye-opener.

ETA Automatic DU Rec for first-person account.

[tinymontgomery]

10. In NC not using your turn signals is common practice

I think they should remove them and lower the price of the car.

[NewGuyDD]

11. You are part of the problem

We constantly denounce the absolute travesty that is our criminal justice system, and you willing partake in sending some poor bastard to jail, possibly for a very long sentence (third felony, maybe life), for a non-violent crime.

Bravo, job well done.

[Arkansas Granny]

17. Um, jury duty is not voluntary. If you are called to serve, you need a pretty good reason

to be excused. The poor bastard with a third felony knew he was engaging in risky, illegal behavior. You can't blame the OP for that.

[JoePhilly]

21. One of my nephews (in-law), had a prior drug bust ... and then while on probation

got picked up in another drug related event (he's driving, other guy is selling), while also carrying a gun.

He was surprised that he got 18 months as a result.

Not sure which part of the "no drugs and no guns" part of his probation agreement confused him.

[yawnmaster]

27. might have been the "no" part...maybe?? eom

[JoePhilly]

29. Sadly, yes.

Even after doing something dumb and going to jail (briefly), he came right out and repeated the "dumb".

And its not like he doesn't have other options. Our family has given him jobs, recommended him for jobs. No luck. He doesn't show up.

And from what we can tell, he doesn't use the drugs. Its not like he is chasing a high.

[yawnmaster]

31. If someone could figure out how to get a kid like that out of that rut he is traveling in...

it would be wonderful.
maybe he is chasing something.

it is definitely sad.

[brewens]

32. My girlfriends nephew was working for us, out on parole for meth manufacturing.

We hosted a comedy show at the Ephrata Washington Eagles Lodge. When we got back to our cafe and unloaded all the catering stuff, he was ready to leave and I offered him a ride. He was on a bike and declined. I could easily have hauled him and the bike home. It was a pretty cold night, St Patrick's Day in fact. I could tell something was wrong.

Sure enough he was going to party. He ended up punching a minor that was giving him crap and ended up on the run. That was a parole violation at least. Eventually they caught up to him and sent him back to prison. We were told he was cooking and using again but all they got him on was the parole violation.

He's been back out and clean for two years now. This is one of the toughest and best looking kids you could imagine. We all hope he makes it. My girlfriend says he just wasn't done yet the first time.

[yawnmaster]

24. Oh B.S. eom

[markpkessinger]

12. I sat on a jury here in NYC on an attempted rape case . . .

As was the case with your experience, there wasn't a whole lot the defense could offer. A young woman, a student at Fashion Institute of Technology, was walking down a street at night in the West 20s. As she passed an open-air parking lot, a man grabbed her and dragged her behind the lot attendants' shed. A cop happened to be a little ways down the block and heard the young woman screaming. Fortunately, he got to the scene before the guy actually got to the point of any kind of penetration; when he pulled the guy off of the young woman, the guy's penis was out of his pants.

The defense offered no witnesses at all, including the defendant. The defense attorney did not contest that the man had assaulted the young woman, put on all the over-the-top theatrics he could muster as he tried to sell the theory that there had been no intent to rape when the man committed the assault. Rather, he said, it was a case of class envy/resentment (the defendant was an indigent African American man and the victim of the assault was an apparently affluent young Asian woman). We didn't buy it, but I'll give the defense attorney credit for trying his best to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Yet, even with such an open-and-shut case, those of us the jury panel wanted to make sure we had done everything we possibly could to ensure we had fairly and adequately considered the arguments of both sides, and had properly evaluated all the evidence presented. We went over all of the testimony and evidence and deliberated for about 4 hours. We ultimately convicted the guy. Afterward we were dismissed, several of us were talking about how, even though we were confident we had come to the correct verdict, it was still a depressing experience to have to convict someone.

Also, one of the assisting defense lawyers came up to us and said that she and her colleagues, while not surprised in the least at the verdict, were surprised by how long we took so long to arrive at it. We explained that it was because we took our responsibility, and the defendant's right to a fair trial, very seriously. Anyway, I came away from the experience feeling very proud of my fellow New Yorkers who served on that jury.

[Arkansas Granny]

15. I served on a jury earlier this year where the defendant was charged with selling crack cocaine.

It turned out that he had been set up by a paid informant. The informant had asked for mj first, but when the defendant said he didn't have anything he asked him about other drugs. The defendant told him he could get some and called him the next day to set up the sale. The informant was followed and undercover police observed part of the transaction, but didn't actually witness the exchange of money for drugs.

When he was arrested, the defendant had no drugs on him and only $35.00 which included one of the marked bills that the informant had used to make the buy. The prosecution tried to make it sound like he was a big time drug dealer. There was no doubt that he was guilty of selling drugs to the informant.

However, during the sentencing phase we found out that this was his first offense of any kind. He and his girlfriend had 6 children and he had worked the same job for 8 years before being laid off earlier in the year. In the end, a few of us were able to convince the other jurors that he was not a hardcore dealer, but someone taking advantage of a situation where he could turn a fast buck. We recommended the lightest sentence possible. I hope things work out for him and his family.

[brewens]

19. I hate those cases the worst. Usually the informant is a bigger

scumbag than the dealer. Taking a deal and setting people up to save his own ass. Many times they get guys that are just users, doing a favor for what they think is a friend. They don't even make any money on it.

In a lot of those cases, the informant will actually pick guys like that to set up. They avoid handing over the hard core dealers they may know. That's who the cops hope to get, but also the people more likely to hurt the informant or his family if things go wrong. They really end up doing nothing but keeping the drug war industry rolling.

[B Calm]

16. We have to stop sending people to jail for drugs, PERIOD!

[cherokeeprogressive]

18. Was the empty bag containing residue the same size as the four 1/2 gram bags? n/t

[brewens]

20. Yeah it was. We didn't know exactly what to make of that. Maybe empty because they used it? n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. Most likely I guess. My first impression was that if it were larger than the rest it could have

gone to proving distribution as the source of the four measured 1/2 grams.

[Egalitarian Thug]

23. Jury nullification is both extra-legal and an American tradition.

I wasn't going to reply at all, but in view of some of the replies I though I should throw this out there.

[yawnmaster]

30. It is definitely an American tradition and, in my opinion, very important...

from wikip...
"...Standard jury trial practice in the United States during the Founding Era and for several decades afterward was to argue all issues of law in the presence of the jury, so that the jury heard the same arguments the bench did in reaching his rulings on motions..."

This of course has changed and juries are not aware of the arguments to the law that are made.

Without the ability to go beyond just analysis of physical and circumstantial evidence, a jury is not as valuable.

Why is a jury defined as a jury of one's peers, if some understanding of the defendants situation is not necessary in the decision?