Jury Duty: Flashback 4 - Nothing Left To Do But Go All In...

Recap:

-Defense and Mrs. S don't refute the fact that Mr. S threw a glass at his wife - only Mrs. S now claims that it was an "accident"
-Two officers testify that the couple never mentioned the incident as an "accident" in either of their formal statements

I remember getting to court early the next morning. In fact, a lot of my brethren had. Looks like I wasn't the only juror anxious to pick up where we left off .

We'd see other jurors we recognized from our initial selection pool walking to their courtrooms. I nodded to a few people I remembered, and they'd nod back. It was the way of things.

I'll admit that I was starting to get a little "trial envy" as our case wore on. It seemed like every case on our floor was going into "plea bargaining" mode -- attorneys ushered their clients out, told them they should cop a plea, and most were willing to do it in a heartbeat! Cases were closing left and right, jurors excused for their services and sent off on their way.

Except ours. But I guess that's just the way of things.

The Daughter got up on the witness stand, her body language mimicking that of her mothers'. She didn't seem as nervous, but she wasn't all that relaxed either.

Defense starts questioning. The Daughter says that she was sitting next to her father when he threw the glass into the fire. The Daughter places her father about 5 ft. from the fire with her mother on the other side of the flames. She says she watched the glass fly into the logs, shattering. The next thing she knew, her mother's face was bleeding badly. Defense rests, and all now seems to be pointing towards this being an "accident."

Prosecution cross-examined, though only determined that the only person The Daughter told about the glass flying up from the ground was the Doctor on call. When asked why her statement was never taken that night, she replied that she was just "too hysterical" to talk with anyone, let alone the police. She too did "not want to see her father in trouble."
Prosecution rests.

The Closing Arguments from both attorneys played out like all "Law and Order" episodes do -- Prosecution believes their case to be solid, with evidence and testimony making it clear that Mr. S should be punished for what he did. Defense counters that too many assumptions were made and the police work was less than thorough, so much so that we should find Mr. S innocent from the willful intent to assault his wife.

After the rules and instructions were read, the 12 of us were ushered into a room to decide the man's fate.

It became clear real quick that Deliberations weren't going to be a walk in the park.

We were so far from "open and shut" that we needed to hitchhike just to get back onto the main road, called "verdict"...

TO BE CONTINUED... ;)