Opinion ID: 1439456
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Post-Trial Hearing

Text: In December 2004, the district court held a post-trial evidentiary hearing to further investigate Juror 523's boss's purported comments. The court and the parties extensively questioned Juror 523, her boss, and a number of other co-workers who may have had knowledge of the boss's purported comments. Ultimately, the district court determined Juror 523's testimony was inconsistent, and the only comment supported by credible testimony was Juror 523 should have said something `outrageous' to get out of jury duty. The court was unable to pinpoint precisely what outrageous comment Juror 523's boss suggested she make to get out of jury service, noting [t]he nominees appear to be `guilty, guilty, guilty,' . . . `hang him,' . . . or `I'm an expert in the law, enjoy the law, he's guilty or something of that nature,' which [was the boss's] description of his `humorous' suggestion. Regardless of the precise content of the comment, the court determined it was made, and taken, in jest, after Juror 523 was selected for the qualified pool, but before Juror 523 was actually seated on the jury. The court found the boss's denial of ever making comments such as guilty, guilty, guilty and fry him to be credible. The court also found credible the boss's testimony he did not know what trial Juror 523 was hearing; did not follow the Honken trial; did not know what the trial was about, apart from `drugs'; did not know that the case was a death penalty case, until after the trial was in progress; and that he did not pay attention to the process. Finally, the district court concluded Juror 523 was not troubled and upset by the comments that her boss was purportedly making, but by the stress of the duties of a juror in a capital case, coupled with the stress of changing `gears' to return to work when she was not in trial, and the fact that she had to go to work while other jurors did not, all of which manifested in a desire to finish deliberations as quickly as possible and to `get her life back.' When questioned about the effect of her boss's comments, Juror 523 stated she ignored all the comments and the comments had no effect on her decision in Honken's case.