Posts Tagged ‘jurors’

Still No Verdict in Deadlocked Britney Trial!

October 20th, 2008 / Author: OK! Staff

The 12 jurors in Britney Spears‘ ongoing misdemeanor trial for driving without a license continued to be deadlocked on Monday afternoon, at the end of their second day of deliberations.

 

The mostly female jury began deliberations on Friday for two hours at a Van Nuys, Calif., courthouse before taking a break for the weekend. The judge in the case, James Steele, had originally given the jurors until 1:30pm, L.A. time, Monday to come to a decision, but after three votes, they are still unable to come to a unanimous decision.

Shortly after 2:30pm PT, Judge Steele asked the jury into the courtroom and polled them individually on whether or not they thought a unified verdict could be reached. The jury foreman replied, "Personally, I don’t think so," while a handful of others thought that it was still a possibility.

All three ballots cast by the jury during their two days of deliberation have come back the same way, 10-2, though it was not announced whether that vote was leaning toward finding Brit guilty or toward acquitting her.

"Everyone has become more entrenched in their position," Juror #16 told the judge.

At that point, the judge asked the jurors to reconvene one final time in an attempt to work out their differences. However, by day’s end, they were still unable to reach a decision, so deliberations continued on into a third day.

CLICK HERE for OK!’s Ultimate Britney Gallery!

So what’s taking the jury so long to decide?

"There are extraneous issues," explains Britney’s attorney, J. Michael Flannagan, to OK!. "She says she’s a Louisiana resident. She wouldn’t be here right now if not for the fact that she has to be here with her kids right now."

Continues Flannagan, "She considers herself a Louisiana girl. She’s building a new house in Louisiana. She’s maintaining her old house in Louisiana. She wants to go back to Louisiana."

To get some clarity, OK! spoke to its own legal eagle, who explained, "What makes Britney’s case tricky is that she is claiming multiple ‘residences.’ In other words, a jury will have to decide where she spends the most time, which home she actually lives in, before determining a verdict in this case.

"Where a person has several ‘residences,’ and it is disputed which is his or her ‘permanent’ residence or domicile, it will be a matter of proof as to which is the state of domicile or permanent residency."

 

Click here for OK!’s Ultimate Britney gallery!

 

Although the Britster herself has not appeared in court, a day’s worth of testimony and arguments were presented to the jury last week. The case revolves around charges filed after the pop star hit a parked car and fled the scene. She was later found to be driving with a Louisiana, not California, driver’s license, a misdemeanor in the state that carries a maximum fine of $1,500 and up to six months in prison.

 

Click here for OK!’s gallery of how the incident went down.

 

The prosecution claims Brit was obligated to obtain a California driver’s license, but her attorney said the "Womanizer" singer really lives in Louisiana, a state she’s properly licensed in.

 

Britney’s lawyer previously rejected a plea deal, citing her celebrity status as a reason to target her.

 

Echoing that sentiment, a court insider remarked, "If she was any other person, she wouldn’t even get a jury," in the court room today.

Britney’s Jury Selected

October 16th, 2008

Buckle up, Britney Spears fans – a jury has been selected in her misdemanor trial for driving without a license.

 

Made up of mostly females, including a wide variety of people in different industries like education, banking and insurance, the panel was finally filled out this morning, after a few bumps in the process. A few prospective jurors were disqualified when they admitted to having strong feelings about Brit’s paparazzi-filled antics, according to the Associated Press.

 

Click here for OK!’s Ultimate Britney gallery!

 

 

The "Womanizer" singer, whose single is on the top of the Billboard charts, wasn’t there,  however openeing statments were expected to begin shortly. Britney’s father, Jamie, is among those set to testify, along with police officers and others.

The case will address a charge leveled against the pop star from last year when she hit a parked car and fled the scene in L.A., and was discovered to have an out-of-state license.

Juror Tells All in Uma Stalker Trial

May 7th, 2008

A Wall Street Journal reporter is sharing her experience as a juror in the Uma Thurman stalker trial, including the jury’s suspicions over whether the actress may have exaggerated her fear.

In an article published on the front page of Wednesday’s paper, Emily Steel says she and 11 other jurors decided to convict former mental patient Jack Jordan of stalking and harassing Thurman.

"Our debate centered on a surprisingly complex question," Steel writes. "Where is the line between obsession and menace?"

One of the issues Steel and the jurors debated was a November, 2005, incident in which Jordan showed up on the NYC set of Thurman’s movie My Super Ex-Girlfriend with a package that included a card with a picture of a child praying, a letter that said "My hands should be on your body at all times," and a photo of a headless bride and Jordan’s expired California drivers license.

"The judge told us we had to decide whether the package was intended to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm her," Steel wrote, adding that there was enough reasonable doubt that jurors couldn’t convict him on that charge, and that "nearly two-thirds of the jurors said the purpose of the card was to express his love."

Then there was the other issue: Jordan showed up at Thurman’s Greenwich Village doorstep last August, rang the door bell repeatedly and slipped a letter through the mail slot. He was arrested in October, and had been living out of his car in Manhattan.

 

As for Uma’s testimony, the actress spent much of the week-long trial giving what some called the best performance of her life. Steel writes that some of the jurors questioned the legitimacy of her fear.

Thurman,38, told the jury she was "completely freaked out" by Jordan’s behavior and called the experience "a nightmare".

"The fact that she was a famous movie star made us partly charmed, partly suspicious," Steel says in the article. "One juror jokingly said Ms. Thurman isn’ t that great an actress, but that her delivery on the witness stand was the most heartfelt performance he’d ever seen her give."

 

In the end, though, Steel and the other jurors convicted Jordan. The 37-year old out-of-work lifeguard and pool cleaner was found guilty on Tuesday on one count of stalking and one count of aggravated harassment, and faces up to one year in jail.

”The decision was easy for us: The nonstop doorbell-ringing, accompanied by a letter like this, clearly sounded like intent to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm,” Steel said. ”We decided on a guilty charge of one count of aggravated harassment.”

AD FPO