According to several universities studies up to 70% of the truth is hidden from juries!?

Question

If you were a juror that had convicted an innocent person of a crime that you found they did not commit after the fact, say, 10 years later! What would you do? Protest? Ignore it? Cry for justice? What?????

Answer 1

Cry for justice? Oh honey. This sounds like a John Grisham scenario, and with all due respect to good old John, his books are heavy on the fiction. A juror cannot undo his decision. If he had tons of money for an attorney and time and a conscience that wouldn't let him rest, he would still be taking on the biggest headache of his life.

There are many so many cases where experienced attorneys cannot get a decision nolle prossed even when they have government testimony completely clearing people of a crime. Once a person is convicted, he is garbage. He is an inmate, a convict, a prisoner. He has 15 minute phone calls to get things resolved, he can't get to his legal paperwork in a nearby locker without finding Staff with a key, he has to wait on the U.S. Mail for answers and questions and copies.....

A government witness, in a government hearing in 1982, cleared my husband of a crime that took place in 1979. We accidentally discovered the testimony in 1993. The government never acted on it, they didn't care. In 1997, with an attorney's help, the State finally nolle prossed the conviction, making my husband eligible for parole under Old Law. He's still in prison, however. The parole board refuses to acknowledge that State Court decision. They can do whatever they want. They don't have to answer to anyone, and have more power than a Judge.

So good luck to the idealistic juror. It's 2006, and my husband hasn't been home in 26 years.

Answer 2

First of course a person on a jury has no legal right to do anything,

And most of the truth that is hidden is that the person was guilty. Alot of evidence of the persons guilt can not be presented because of errors in handling the evidence, hearsay evidence and the such. Almost never is evidnece that was available at trial that proved thier innocent not included.

so normally it works they other way, the person is found not guilty and after the trial they find out that all sorts of evidence was there, fingerprints, confessions and the such that could not be used in trial.

Answer 3

Does not surprise me.. 70% is a lot. Never been to a big trial.. but.. OJ trial..Mendoza bros. on TV. Attorneys are actors/actresses.. putting on that show in the court room. Hidden truth. That cost extra.. sometimes not just money.. favors ect..I would have to do something if i convicted an innocent person. And knew they were not guilty.