Wecht trial ends

[Norman T. Field]

You will notice, of course, that Peter cannot answer my question and he offers not one iota of evidence that the Wecht trial was the result of "selective prosecution". His view of the case derives, I suggest, not from facts but rather from his "world view".

Of course I agree with Dr. Wecht's position on the asassination and I admire his work on it and his courage in offering his dissenting position to the collective view of so many of his peers (in fact I once had a very brief but very pleasant conversation with Dr. Wecht in which he stated that Gov. Connally's wounds come have come from a gunman firing from the 6th floor west window of the TSBD). I hope that he is innocent and that if is innocent that justice will be done.

Tim, while Peter, of course, has no proof that this is "selective prosecution" the circumstances of Wecht's prosecution are indeed curious. In my experience as a newsreader, political figures guilty of similar "crimes" are usually removed from office and disgraced. I can't recall one similar prosecution.

When one reads about J. Edgar Hoover, moreover, it's clear he was guilty of far worse "crimes" (not even mentioning his blackmailing and withholding of evidence apparent elsewhere). He had his black chauffeurs declared agents so they could avoid military service, and so he could tell congress there were indeed black FBI agents. He also had his agents write propaganda books promoting the FBI and attacking communism, released them under his own name, and pocketed the proceeds. He also had the FBI exhibits section constantly remodel his home, at taxpayer expense.

Would you not agree that, if Wecht is guilty of "crimes," Hoover was a master criminal?

But did Hover have his live in male secretary, paid at taxpayer's expense, use a governmnet fax machine for private business, like Wecht is accused of doing?

BK

Didn't Clyde Tolson die b4 the fax machine was invented. Clyde did everything else at taxpayer's expense.

[Joel D. Gruhn]

It appears the jury in the Wecht trial is having difficulties - perhaps with one holdout juror?

Wecht jury continues minus-1

from http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburgh...l/s_560257.html

"U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab this morning decided to go with a panel of 11, after a juror who left ill yesterday said he could not continue. The judge said Juror No. 1's doctor advised the juror that the stress of deliberations was too much for him.

This afternoon, Wecht's lawyers filed an emergency motion requesting that Schwab reverse his order to dismiss the juror -- Stanley Albright, a prison minister from East Hills. Schwab has forbidden the press from contacting Albright or any of the six alternate jurors until a verdict is rendered."

/jdg

[Chris Brown]

Peter Lemkin wrote:

“Wow...one wouldn't think Jury deliberation would be stressful unless it was involving some mighty heated debates......”

My experience of Jury duty in the UK was fairly stressful.

I was fifty yrs old at the time and (thankfully) wasn’t picked on a nasty sex case.

Ended up on a minor social security fraud case which was stressful enough.

However my biggest shock was the fact that at the time of my jury duty there were two murder cases going on. On both murder jury’s there were a fair percentage (about 20-30 %) of you young jurors (20 to 25 yrs old) IMO much too young to have to deal with such cases. I was also surprised to find out how many of my friends, acquaintances and colleagues of a similar age to me had never been on Jury duty.

Chris Brown.

[John Simkin]

I was also surprised to find out how many of my friends, acquaintances and colleagues of a similar age to me had never been on Jury duty.

I have never been called for jury service. Nor have any of my political friends. However, those who were not left-wing activists have been called. I am sure we are all on a database somewhere.

[Dixie Dea]

For those who have never been summoned for Jury Duty, don't rule it out!

This is my own Jury experiences, which will be a little bit of humor and a little bit of seriousness.

For many years I never received a summons. Yet, I was one of those that was wanting to have that experience. So, one day I was talking to my sister, on the phone and she mentioned she had to go for Jury Duty the following day....and what a pain it was to have to take off work. I told her about never even receiving a summons and was one of those wanting to go. The very next day, I went out to get my mail and lo and behold, there was my very first jury summons. I couldn't believe it, but I did wonder who had been tapping my phone....:-)

Of course, I did go and was actually chosen to be on a jury. ...and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Although, I also felt it was rather stressful, when trying hard to pay attention. Once, I started having a hard time keeping my eyes open, but then the Judge saved me, by calling for a short recess. Another time, something about the air conditioing, caused me to have a coughing spell. It did attract attention and I was quite embarrased. Some on the jury, did give me a sympathetic look and one also gave me a cough drop. Then, the Baliff brought me a glass of water. But again, fortunately the Judge called for a recess and I got okay then. I was afraid he was going to kick me off the jury....:-). But as soon as we were all seated, a juror next to me started coughing...but then she got over it right away.

The last time I went, I made it to the jury selection for the questioning, but they got enough before I was ever called. Although it took all day and we had to return the next day, but I got to leave early. However, that particular Judge allowed bottled water or soft drinks in his courtroom, which I though was a good thing, for our dry throats.

The worst part was that we could not discuss the case among each other for three days. There are things that occur, which you just feel a strong desire to at least mention...like maybe somethng funny was said. But you just have to refrain from it. Plus for the most part, you have to constantly be on guard to remain expressionless, when any one conneceted, is encountered. Yet your natural inclinition would usually to be to smile and maybe say, hi. You just have to be very, very careful.

Throughout the trial, maybe you are buying eiher the Prosecution or the Defence and you can't help wondering if the others are thinking the same as you are about it. You even wonder about, what if you might be the only hold out and if you would be able to see their reasoning or not. As soon as the case is handed to the jury to ponder the verdict and as soon as the door is shut, it is like a dam has burst. All your pent up thoughts, feelings and emotions can finally be shared. Once we discovered we had felt that an Asst DA was saying some absolutely rediculous comments and found out that we had all felt that it had been hard to keep a straight face.

Since that first time, I have received a jury summons every year and have actually served on three juries. In each one, the jury took a ballot immedietely, to see what page we were all on. On my last jury, we only had one person who had a different opinion. But none of us tried to browbeat her. On that particular case, I believe it was only eight that had to agree and that woman was the only one of the twelve, that did not vote the same as the rest of us did....which was okay though.

The Jury parking area around my local courthouse is a real big problem, plus there is sometimes a train that will hold you up and it is quite a long walk too. So, I always took a cab and had no such problems at all.

This has not happened with me, but with several friends when they were on a jury. Some friend or relative of the person on trial, has atempted to have an exchange.....like for example, to ask if you can make change for their twenty dollars. Or they might ask if you would loan them a dollar. They sometimes think of many schemes, which could have many obvious inplications. All you can do is ignore them, without a word, turn around and walk away from them. Many instances it also needs to be reported, although if minor, most just disregard it and hope no one else saw it.

The last jury summons I received, it was necessary for me to get a Medical excuse. This actually disppointed me. because I am one of the strange ones that really did enjoy serving on a jury. Although, I don't think I would feel the same if it was a horrendos type of Court Case or one that went on for weeks.

I just thought I would share some of my jury experiences with those who have never been on a jury. If you are considered a friendly type person, it might not be so easy to wear a blank face or to appear to be aloof. Usually though you have some jury members who you can have lunch with and can discuss everything, except the current trial....usually the talk is about other juries you have served on. Heck, I even enjoyed that pre-selection, potential jury gathering room. Most everyone else was bored to death though. I enjoyed sitting on the nice, secluded patio and also the snack room and chatting with others. Once I met a man who had played bit parts in many big movies. He even had his scrapbook with him and showed some of his photos.

I think he brought it to have things to talk about. He was quite an interesting person!

I also should add that I have never seen the problems that I have heard about with other juries. Mine have always been smooth sailing between us. Any conflicts were always handled very well, by going over portions of testimony or perhaps re-watching a video several times. No one was ever hassled or pressured.

I have a bad feeling that bad conflicts may be happening in Dr Wecht's Jury Room!

_________

Dixie

[Pat Speer]

I was the first juror kicked off the panel for a murder trial. My sister has been a juror on two different murder trials. The first one resulted in a conviction. The second one was a mis-trial, after the defendant successfully pulled the O.J. defense--"these racist white cops framed me"--and found a woman in the jury to believe him. After the trial, the prosecutor asked my sister out on a date. On the date, he explained to her that this was the SECOND trial for the defendant, because he'd pulled the O.J. defense the first time as well--and had found one woman to believe him. He told my sister that there would not be a third trial, but not to worry because in between the two trials the defendant had been convicted for conspiring to murder the judge in the first trial, and that he would be in prison for quite some time.

As anyone who's watched Twelve Angry Men should know, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors.

[Robert Howard]

For those who have never been summoned for Jury Duty, don't rule it out!

This is my own Jury experiences, which will be a little bit of humor and a little bit of seriousness.

For many years I never received a summons. Yet, I was one of those that was wanting to have that experience. So, one day I was talking to my sister, on the phone and she mentioned she had to go for Jury Duty the following day....and what a pain it was to have to take off work. I told her about never even receiving a summons and was one of those wanting to go. The very next day, I went out to get my mail and lo and behold, there was my very first jury summons. I couldn't believe it, but I did wonder who had been tapping my phone....:-)

Of course, I did go and was actually chosen to be on a jury. ...and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Although, I also felt it was rather stressful, when trying hard to pay attention. Once, I started having a hard time keeping my eyes open, but then the Judge saved me, by calling for a short recess. Another time, something about the air conditioing, caused me to have a coughing spell. It did attract attention and I was quite embarrased. Some on the jury, did give me a sympathetic look and one also gave me a cough drop. Then, the Baliff brought me a glass of water. But again, fortunately the Judge called for a recess and I got okay then. I was afraid he was going to kick me off the jury....:-). But as soon as we were all seated, a juror next to me started coughing...but then she got over it right away.

The last time I went, I made it to the jury selection for the questioning, but they got enough before I was ever called. Although it took all day and we had to return the next day, but I got to leave early. However, that particular Judge allowed bottled water or soft drinks in his courtroom, which I though was a good thing, for our dry throats.

The worst part was that we could not discuss the case among each other for three days. There are things that occur, which you just feel a strong desire to at least mention...like maybe somethng funny was said. But you just have to refrain from it. Plus for the most part, you have to constantly be on guard to remain expressionless, when any one conneceted, is encountered. Yet your natural inclinition would usually to be to smile and maybe say, hi. You just have to be very, very careful.

Throughout the trial, maybe you are buying eiher the Prosecution or the Defence and you can't help wondering if the others are thinking the same as you are about it. You even wonder about, what if you might be the only hold out and if you would be able to see their reasoning or not. As soon as the case is handed to the jury to ponder the verdict and as soon as the door is shut, it is like a dam has burst. All your pent up thoughts, feelings and emotions can finally be shared. Once we discovered we had felt that an Asst DA was saying some absolutely rediculous comments and found out that we had all felt that it had been hard to keep a straight face.

Since that first time, I have received a jury summons every year and have actually served on three juries. In each one, the jury took a ballot immedietely, to see what page we were all on. On my last jury, we only had one person who had a different opinion. But none of us tried to browbeat her. On that particular case, I believe it was only eight that had to agree and that woman was the only one of the twelve, that did not vote the same as the rest of us did....which was okay though.

The Jury parking area around my local courthouse is a real big problem, plus there is sometimes a train that will hold you up and it is quite a long walk too. So, I always took a cab and had no such problems at all.

This has not happened with me, but with several friends when they were on a jury. Some friend or relative of the person on trial, has atempted to have an exchange.....like for example, to ask if you can make change for their twenty dollars. Or they might ask if you would loan them a dollar. They sometimes think of many schemes, which could have many obvious inplications. All you can do is ignore them, without a word, turn around and walk away from them. Many instances it also needs to be reported, although if minor, most just disregard it and hope no one else saw it.

The last jury summons I received, it was necessary for me to get a Medical excuse. This actually disppointed me. because I am one of the strange ones that really did enjoy serving on a jury. Although, I don't think I would feel the same if it was a horrendos type of Court Case or one that went on for weeks.

I just thought I would share some of my jury experiences with those who have never been on a jury. If you are considered a friendly type person, it might not be so easy to wear a blank face or to appear to be aloof. Usually though you have some jury members who you can have lunch with and can discuss everything, except the current trial....usually the talk is about other juries you have served on. Heck, I even enjoyed that pre-selection, potential jury gathering room. Most everyone else was bored to death though. I enjoyed sitting on the nice, secluded patio and also the snack room and chatting with others. Once I met a man who had played bit parts in many big movies. He even had his scrapbook with him and showed some of his photos.

I think he brought it to have things to talk about. He was quite an interesting person!

I also should add that I have never seen the problems that I have heard about with other juries. Mine have always been smooth sailing between us. Any conflicts were always handled very well, by going over portions of testimony or perhaps re-watching a video several times. No one was ever hassled or pressured.

I have a bad feeling that bad conflicts may be happening in Dr Wecht's Jury Room!

_________

Dixie

This is the most recent news regarding Cyril Wecht's Trial.

See

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08087/868444-100.stm

[Joel D. Gruhn]

Is Judge Schwab fishing for a conviction? It surely seems that way.

from http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburgh...l/s_560488.html

Wecht jurors say they are deadlocked

The jurors in the federal public corruption trial of former Allegheny County Coroner Dr. Cyril H. Wecht have indicated they are deadlocked on all counts, but will return Monday to try a final time to reach a unanimous verdict.

U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab polled each juror this afternoon, and each said he or she was "hopelessly deadlocked" and that further deliberations would not help.

Before declaring a hung jury and a mistrial, Schwab asked the jurors to continue deliberating in hopes of reaching a unanimous verdict on any counts.

"I realize you are having some difficulty reaching a unanimous verdict, and that is not unusual," Schwab said before sending the jury back around 2:15 p.m. He told them there was no hurry.

[Tim Gratz]

Peter wrote:

This Judge has been biased against the Defense from the get-go! He had not allowed any mention of the political nature and issue of selective prosecution,

Readers will recall that days ago I asked Mr. Lemkin to post any proof whatsoever that the Wecht trial constituted "selective prosecution" and he failed to post anything to prove that. And yet he now repeats the assertion that I submit he knows is utterly lacking in merit. Just incredible.

[Denis Pointing]

Is Judge Schwab fishing for a conviction? It surely seems that way.

from http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburgh...l/s_560488.html

Wecht jurors say they are deadlocked

The jurors in the federal public corruption trial of former Allegheny County Coroner Dr. Cyril H. Wecht have indicated they are deadlocked on all counts, but will return Monday to try a final time to reach a unanimous verdict.

U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab polled each juror this afternoon, and each said he or she was "hopelessly deadlocked" and that further deliberations would not help.

Before declaring a hung jury and a mistrial, Schwab asked the jurors to continue deliberating in hopes of reaching a unanimous verdict on any counts.

"I realize you are having some difficulty reaching a unanimous verdict, and that is not unusual," Schwab said before sending the jury back around 2:15 p.m. He told them there was no hurry.

This Judge has been biased against the Defense from the get-go! He had not allowed any mention of the political nature and issue of selective prosecution, as well as some 'strange happenings' and malfeasance of  those fishing for information against Wecht. This will come out in further detai

 after the trial. 

were. This was a vindictive fishing expedition and polkitcaly-motivated selective prosecution with a 'hanging judge'. The Jurors sent a note to the Judge that they were deadlocked and that no further time would change that. The Judge all but said, get me a conviction and take all the time you need.....this is the way much of 'Justice' is going in the USA now. Look at how the Judge acted in the case of Mumia Al Jamal and he's still in prison! [the Judge was heard to say to the Prosecutor that he'd help hang the N----r.]

Strange how people see things from differant angles, Peter sees the jury deadlock as something positive, i.e. "It seems the Jury sensed it, perhaps, and/or some thought that the charges were just plain ficticious and vindictive " I, on the other hand, see the deadlock as somewhat negative, as it shows the case to be nowhere near as cut and dry as many here (including me) would like it to be and that at least some jury members belive Wecht to be guilty. As they say, to some the cup is half full, to others its half empty. Denis.

[Dawn Meredith]

I was also surprised to find out how many of my friends, acquaintances and colleagues of a similar age to me had never been on Jury duty.

I have never been called for jury service. Nor have any of my political friends. However, those who were not left-wing activists have been called. I am sure we are all on a database somewhere.

I think you are absolutely correct John.

Ejoyed reading the juror's experiences. I too have never served and

would love to. My prayers are with Dr Wecht. Deadlocked can mean anything. Maybe it's just one person holding out for conviction. We won't know until this is over. The sad thing is IF the judge allows the jurors to say how they were deadlocked , eg half to convict, excellent chance DA will re-try. So this is potentially horrible for Dr Wecht.

Dawn

[Ron Ecker]

The sad thing is IF the judge allows the jurors to say how they were deadlocked , eg half to convict, excellent chance DA will re-try. So this is potentially horrible for Dr Wecht.

Well, I imagine the whole idea in these things is that if you can't get the target convicted for something, you can at least financially ruin him.

[Dawn Meredith]

The sad thing is IF the judge allows the jurors to say how they were deadlocked , eg half to convict, excellent chance DA will re-try. So this is potentially horrible for Dr Wecht.

Well, I imagine the whole idea in these things is that if you can't get the target convicted for something, you can at least financially ruin him.

Yup, that's the idea. Let's HOPE the jury remains deadlocked and the judge is forced to declare a mistrial. Then hope that on balance there were only a couple of holdouts for conviction. And I hope that they will talk with the media, once released.

Erick- (my husband, law partner and forum member )- had an interesting experience yesterday related to this. At a CLE (Continuing Legal Ed. ) class, the subject was witness prep and jury selection. The presenter told of one prospective juror who was a counsellor and said, one of her areas of concentration is with people who had been victims of brain washing by the government. He said he got rid of her figuring she was a loonie. So my husband went up to him and asked him if he knew about the CIA and MKULTRA. "No" was the resposnse. So Erick, who is actually shy in social settings- (but NOT in his law practice)- went up to several more attorneys and asked the same question. All had the same response "No." He told them all to google it, even wrote it down. They won't. I have been doing this for years to no avail. As someone pointed out I believe in this thread, the more educated a person is, the less they know or WANT TO KNOW on this stuff. I noticed this many decades ago.

Dawn

[Terry Mauro]

The sad thing is IF the judge allows the jurors to say how they were deadlocked , eg half to convict, excellent chance DA will re-try. So this is potentially horrible for Dr Wecht.

Well, I imagine the whole idea in these things is that if you can't get the target convicted for something, you can at least financially ruin him.

Yup, that's the idea. Let's HOPE the jury remains deadlocked and the judge is forced to declare a mistrial. Then hope that on balance there were only a couple of holdouts for conviction. And I hope that they will talk with the media, once released.

Erick- (my husband, law partner and forum member )- had an interesting experience yesterday related to this. At a CLE (Continuing Legal Ed. ) class, the subject was witness prep and jury selection. The presenter told of one prospective juror who was a counsellor and said, one of her areas of concentration is with people who had been victims of brain washing by the government. He said he got rid of her figuring she was a loonie. So my husband went up to him and asked him if he knew about the CIA and MKULTRA. "No" was the resposnse. So Erick, who is actually shy in social settings- (but NOT in his law practice)- went up to several more attorneys and asked the same question. As someone pointed out I believe in this thread, the more educated a person is, the less they know or WANT TO KNOW on this stuff. I noticed this many decades ago. All had the same response "No." He told them all to google it, even wrote it down. They won't. I have been doing this for years to no avail.

Dawn

*****************************************************

As someone pointed out, I believe in this thread, the more educated a person is, the less they know or WANT TO KNOW on this stuff. I noticed this many decades ago. All had the same response "No." He told them all to google it, even wrote it down. They won't.

And, in their insecurity and sometimes [outright] avarice, they become complicit, in and of, themselves for not being unbiased enough to take a look at both sides of the coin. Just another crew of ostriches and sheeple, you'll never be able to count on, IMHO.

A "hypocritic oath" for the profession of law. Pardon my bastardization of the word "hypocrisy."

Edited April 5, 2008 by Terry Mauro

[Christopher Hall]

Here is today's nondevelopment: http://www.philly.com/philly/wires/ap/news...urntuesday.html

Notice how the judge prohibited the DA from advising the jury that it can have a split verdict or defense verdict on some counts and a conviction on others.

Tomorrow may be the day for the judge to declare a mistrial.