Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 5 Share on Twitter 1 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds    H2'ed 7/10/11

Jury Reaches the Verdict: We are the Guilty!

By       (Page 2 of 5 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page. (View How Many People Read This)   25 comments
Author 24172
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Edip Yuksel
Become a Fan
  (7 fans)

For me, truth and justice are priceless! They are worth fighting for. Now, I was going to fight for a little guy who had nothing to lose except an old bicycle and his little freedom to roam the streets and parks. And now he had lost both.  


The 0.363 grams!


Robert Tracy Wilson is a homeless man in his forties. On January 19th 2011, he was arrested in a public restroom after the park was closed. A police officer noticing a bicycle by the bathroom wall stops by and finds the defendant by the sink with a lighter in one hand and a finger bleeding. On the sink he sees an aluminum beer can split into halves. Then he notices a little metal tube on the bathroom's concrete floor and a tiny piece of crack cocaine on the sink, 363 milligrams, according to police report. Robert is arrested and charged for "unlawfully possessing a narcotic drug, to wit: cocaine base, and unlawfully possessing drug paraphernalia, to wit: pipe."


The evidence is circumstantial. The police has no evidence that Robert was high on drugs or he actually possessed a narcotic drug and paraphernalia; in legal terminology he was allegedly in "constructive possession" of the drug. There is neither fingerprint on the pipe nor on the crack. The pipe does not have the screen in the end, which was used in favor of the defendant by the public defender, Dean Brault. As a response, the prosecutor, Gordon Bennett, through several expert witnesses provided free public education about the many ways of using drugs! I am a teetotaler. All my life, I have never used alcohol or drugs, never smoked cigarettes, and as you might guess, I have also never gambled. So, I have no empathy for the alleged crime, and I consider alcohol and drugs most harmful afflictions in human history, at par with wars and perhaps little creatures such as viruses, germs and mosquitoes.


I will not bother you with the details of this case and the arguments of the parties. In fact, I found that all the factual details were distraction and smoke screen. Unfortunately, like most of the jury, my friends would be distracted by the facts of this particular case. They were excited to act like detectives in movies and employ all their smarts to reach guilty or non-guilty verdict. I see the devil in some details. If we ignore the bigger picture and get lost in the cracks of the details, the justice too might get lost. I also know that there are literally hundreds of similar cases around the nation every working day, and juries are disoriented and misled into looking for justice in the tiny cracks of an unjust system.


Nullification versus Planting Reasonable Doubt


I am surprised that other jury members pick me as their foreperson. The jury members are comprised of three women and six men. Among the jurors there are two engineers, a chemist with doctorate degrees, two university students, a medical claims specialist, a social worker, and I do not remember the occupation of the alternate juror.

When we are taken to the jury room for deliberation, it is already noon. Before taking a lunch break, I ask the jury members to raise their hands if they find the defendant guilty. Five out of eight raise their hands. I let them discuss it for about fifteen minutes. There are some doubts regarding the possession of paraphernalia, but the majority has no reasonable doubt that the defendant possessed the crack cocaine. We take a forty minute lunch break.


Before raising doubts about the prosecutor's allegations, I decide to share with them my ethical trepidation. They listened to my emotional yet reasonable argument for about five minutes. There is complete silence in the room. They look at me and tell me that they indeed do agree with me ethically. But, they immediately add that they want to indulge in discussing the facts of the case, since they must follow the rules of law as they promised the judge.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5


Must Read 14   Well Said 9   Supported 6  
Rate It | View Ratings

Edip Yuksel Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

EDIP YUKSEL, J.D. is a progressive American-Turkish-Kurdish author/philosopher/lawyer/activist (too many hyphens and slashes, I know). His recent English books "Quran: a Reformist Translation", "Manifesto for Islamic Reform", and "NINETEEN: God's (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Joe the Democrat Decides to Vote for McCain. Here is Why:

Jury Reaches the Verdict: We are the Guilty!

An American Muslim's Moral Quandary

Forty Plus Grumpy Old Men and My Son

On Israel, Palestine, Suicide Bombers, and Terror

Militarist Evangelists vs. Taliban: Look-alike Holy Rivals

To View Comments or Join the Conversation: