Moussaoui jury still working despite juror error Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:42am ET16 U.S. News By Deborah Charles ALEXANDRIA, Virginia (Reuters) - A judge on Friday admonished a juror in the Zacarias Moussaoui death penalty case for looking up a word in the dictionary but said it would not impact deliberations in the only case brought in the United States in connection with the September 11 attacks. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said one of the 12-person jury had admitted to looking up the word "aggravating" in an online dictionary. Brinkema did not identify the juror. The word "aggravating" is a key word contained throughout a lengthy form that jurors must fill out in reaching a verdict. The uncertainty on the part of the juror could indicate the panel is having trouble reaching agreement. They must weigh "aggravating factors" against "mitigating factors" to decide if Moussaoui should be executed or sentenced to life in prison and must be unanimous if they recommend the death penalty. Brinkema, however, said she and lawyers from both sides had agreed that it was not a "material violation." Moussaoui, 37, has pleaded guilty to six counts of conspiracy in connection with the September 11 attacks. The jury resumed on Friday after a day's break when one of the jurors called in sick. On Tuesday the panel of nine men and three women asked Brinkema if they could have a dictionary but the judge refused. She told jurors not to conduct any type of independent investigation. On Friday Brinkema re-read her instructions and told jurors that "aggravating also means to make something worse." The government has accused Moussaoui of various offenses, and has included aggravating factors that make them worse and would support imposition of the death penalty. Moussaoui testified he was meant to pilot a fifth airplane into the White House as part of the September 11 plot. He also said he had no remorse for the hijackings and wished more Americans had died. © Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.
I would think that the jurors should be able to look up any word they question. Once it's on record that they can't, lawyers would start throwing in words they know the jurors dont' understand knowing that they can't look them up. Yeah, as though there's not enough raw Latin thrown around in the court system as it is. Give them a couple of different dictionaries and let them go at it.
Ususally a judge would allow clarification of legal terms in the process. A dictionary might not give the definition in the legal use of the term, but I don't see where it would hurt if used with a clear legal clarification.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aaf709 @ Apr 28 2006, 01:31 PM) [snapback]246723[/snapback]</div> With juries run like this, I can see why you tried to avoid jury duty.
While I have no problem with a juror wanting clarification on the meaning of a word, the process was faulty. An online dictionary should not have been used. If the juror didn't know the meaning OR wanted clarification of the meaning as it pertains to a legal document and the law, the juror should have asked the judge. Or asked the foreman to forward a request for clarification to the judge from the entire jury.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Apr 28 2006, 11:35 AM) [snapback]246772[/snapback]</div> OMG, What she said. Because those are legal words and have a different meaning than your "Funk & Wagnalls" and each dictionary has one or more definitions for each word. He/she could have asked the Judge for a definition. Wildkow
Working in the Criminal Justice field for the last 11 yrs, I wholeheartedly agree that the juror went about finding the information the wrong way, especially in a Death Penalty case. I deal with Death Penalty cases on a daily basis and there is a strict line that must be followed to make sure that the conviction is upheld in the appeals process and any deviation from that line could cause problems in the future. It wouldn't suprise me that if he is sentenced to death, that his appellate attorney would try to use that juror's actions to get the sentence overturned.