It was nothing
False alarm. It's a note from one of the jurors. Apparently his daughter is graduating from high school Friday (because she was in summer school) and he asked if he could come in at 11:15. The judge said he would try to accommodate him, and he and the attorneys would discuss tomorrow depending on what happens tomorrow. So, no verdict or deadlock or further request. So we go another day.
Jerry Anderson will be in jail another night without knowing if jurors think he's guilty or not guilty. I wish I knew, at least what the split is. We know from the letter Monday that some jurors - plural - have stated opinions and are not wavering and some have ceased deliberations. But we've gone two days further now of them deliberating so I guess most are being reasonable about this. I can't imagine the stress or the pressure they are feeling. I've never been on a jury, never been asked to be on one. I can imagine they are ready to be home or back at work, especially the alternates. They are just sitting in a room. Cayer told them not to even discuss the case. I think Cayer is ready for a verdict, too. Sometimes when he comes in, he seems almost frustrated or impatient, maybe tired. I know he has invested so much time in this case, and I bet he wants a verdict. I think we all want a verdict.
Blog to y'all tomorrow morning.
Jerry Anderson will be in jail another night without knowing if jurors think he's guilty or not guilty. I wish I knew, at least what the split is. We know from the letter Monday that some jurors - plural - have stated opinions and are not wavering and some have ceased deliberations. But we've gone two days further now of them deliberating so I guess most are being reasonable about this. I can't imagine the stress or the pressure they are feeling. I've never been on a jury, never been asked to be on one. I can imagine they are ready to be home or back at work, especially the alternates. They are just sitting in a room. Cayer told them not to even discuss the case. I think Cayer is ready for a verdict, too. Sometimes when he comes in, he seems almost frustrated or impatient, maybe tired. I know he has invested so much time in this case, and I bet he wants a verdict. I think we all want a verdict.
Blog to y'all tomorrow morning.
posted by THE HICKORY DAILY RECORD at at
4:56 PM
33 Comments:
The jury has been deliberating for more than 4 days. If you take into consideration that they,(each individual), had the weekend to think about all the facts and probably toss and turn while trying to sleep, then it's been 6 days of deliberation. All of this and still no verdict; so do ya'll think that even if he is conviced now that the appeals court won't take into consideration that the jury took that long to decide?
Does anyone know the statistics on verdicts, (either guilty or not guilty), after this amount of deliberation?
Does the judge not have the authority to override the jury's verdict if he disagrees with it?
I don't think the judge can override the jury's verdict .
ABSOLUTELY NOT! He can have no bearing on their verdict. He can however advise on sentencing.
Scott Peterson was convicted of murdering his wife and unborn child after 11 and 1/2 hours of jury deliberation. His conviction was based entirely on circumstantial evidence.
And by the way, "eye witnesses" reportedly saw Lacey walking her dog in the park after Scott had loaded her dead body in the back of his truck and was on his way to San Francisco Bay with it.
RE: tos...Scott Peterson was guilty by his actions just as O.J. was...He ran...Simple fact..Just as the idiot in Wyoming that shot his wife,David Munis,then he killed himself..Mr. Anderson did not run nor hide..I remain unbiased in this issue,I prefer to listen to the facts presented to us and base my opinions on that..No harm intended..Thanks..
It seems to me that a lot of people want to discount the eye witnesses in this case. Correct me if I am wrong but the first of the two eye witnesses saw EA the day she was supposed to have gone missing at a superette with a man with a mullet hair cut. Then she was seen by two more eye witnesses in South Carolina after that. Two of the three eye witnesses did not know EA or JA so what would they have to gain by saying that they saw her? Am I missing something here?
It has been established that she was going to leave her husband by the first of the year. She went missing two days before the first. She gets her hair done and has blonde streaks put back in it but then when the hairdresser, (the same one who fixed her hair the day before she went missing), does EAs hair for the funeral it is darker and she testified to that. How does that all work? Doesn't that have to put a reasonable doubt into your mind as to what really happened?
There has been so much evidence presented by the defense to establish the fact that she was alive after the time when the shooting was supposed to have taken place. Is that enough to put a reasonable doubt in your mind that she really did leave on here own.
Scott Peterson ran???
Sawmillman, I just read your post about the people in high positions being for Anderson, Who, please tell us,are those people in high positions?
This is Sawmills, there are no high positions, I've lived my whole life here except for service years and I want to know these peoples identity so I can be awed.
Exactly Larry...Reasonable doubt, those are the key words her.
How can anyone send a man to his death(no matter what their opinion of guilt or innocence) when there is reasonable doubt and no real evidence. I can not find the man guilty on the evidence presented..no matter that I have a hunch he might have done the deed... i could not find him guilty by law! So he walks , and i don't really know if he did it or not. but i know the prosecution did NOT prove he did it...thats the law!
What comes to my mind about this case is the medical examiner's report that EA had been dead 2 to 4 days...do the math...how could JA have murdered her on Dec. 29? Any thoughts about this from you bloggers?
James i don't know what you read. But i never said there were people in high positions ON Jerry Andersons SIDE I'm sorry but you have the wrong person. Oh by the way I have lived here all my life also so i would know if there were people like that around here !!!!
i think you have done a wonderful job reporting this trial , i read daily. often credit is not given where credit is due, hats off 2
JAMES you kinda drifted there . Like i said before . You didn't read where I said there were people in high positions on Jerry Andersons side .
Sorry sawmillman, must have read that on some other blog and just got the wrong person.
The other James who is posting isn't me, I'm never that nice.
Ther is soooo much reasonable doubt here that I don't see how anyone can have any question.
I don't have a "dog in this fight" but have been following the trial since Day 1.
It seems that Roscoe P. Coltrain, Enos, and the rest of the group failed miserably.
I don't know if JA did it or not, but I can't see how anyone with a clear conscience could convict him on the evidence presented. No proven scene of the crime, no weapon, no FIRM evidence.
I think an investigation of the CCSD may be in order since they seem to be incompitent in handling a case such as this. Or, perhaps, the politics overpower the "long arm of the law".
I still have a lot of questions for Mr. Keith Keen. But, maybe his family has too much political clout in Caldwell county. Maybe that's why he was not called to testify. He, obviously, broke the law when he tampered with evidence during the investigation. And he is the only one who had "chain of custody" of the evidence on the trip from Duncan to Lenoir> And he is not a member of Law Enforcement.
Can we say "Political contributions"?
Larry, I'm am in a state of confusion, WHEN did the ladies say they saw Emily? What day?
The length of time a jury deliberates isn't something the appeals court can consider. Chances
are, the jury is leaning toward guilty at this point. If the majority was thinking not guilty, I think the few holdouts for a guilty verdict would have caved in by now. It is much harder to get someone voting not guilty to change their mind. My guess, especially with the request to review the eveidence, is that it is 10 - 2 or 9 - 3 for conviction at this point. This is the thinking of a wise, ancient Chinaman.
We're not talking so much about circumstantial evidence as about lack of evidence here.
James the women said they saw her the Tuesday after ther the Thursday she disappeared .
I would like to know who made the phone call to the Waffle House in Duncan from Dallas. Did they have an accent? Were they on their way from NC to Mexico? Were these questions brought up or answered during the trial?
And....
Allison, Wherefore art thou? I really enjoyed your input and we haven't heard from you in awhile!
JM are the alternates still there? I thought they were dismissed after it goes to deliberations? anyone know the rules?
PS ....JM you are doing a magnificent job!!!!!!!!
Yes Scott peterson dyed his hair and ran to southeren California near the border of Tijiauana before he was caught...
Walchung.. you're a daft Chinaman. Since most people are logical, cognitive, thinkers.. the 2-3 hold-outs are for conviction. Most people understand reasonable doubt, unfortunately it seems there are a few angry-at-the-world, spiteful non-thinkers on the jury who aren't capable of thinking past their guts.
The United states judicial system itself is a deterrant to crime because who wants to be judged by 12 people not smart enough to get OFF of jury duty?
:)
I personally have never served on a jury for a murder trial...but a few years ago I was on a jury deliberating whether or not to send a man to prison for molesting his 7-year old step daughter. This had been going on for five years as told by the now 12-year old girl. Boy that was tough...After several days of deliberating we found the man not guilty due to lack of evidence. Boy was that tough... to think that we may have let this man go free but yet he was guilty. This bothered me for a long time....but several months later that girl's teacher told me that she had confessed to lying about the molestation because she didn't like him and she wanted her mother to divorce him. What a relief. If we had convicted him he would have spent years in jail for something that he didn't do. I am not saying that Jerry is not guily, or guilty for that matter...just trying to show you how the jurors are feeling to some extent. I know that this is more serious.
Are the Two witnesses in SC Reliable?
Betty Dillard and Tammy Belcher. Both testified to seeing the truck in the parking lot for a few days and then seeing a woman get out of a vehicle and approach the truck Jan. 3, 2006, between 12:30-1 p.m. Dillard testified that she saw a beige and brown Jeep pull up beside the truck, and a woman she identified from a photo as Emily Anderson got out.
I haven’t seen pictures of the motel where the Truck was found or the parking lot. I’m assuming it’s like most motels where the doors face the parking lot and upper levels have a railed walkway along the front. At the motels I’ve stayed at around 7:00am to 10:00am the parking lot empties and the cleaning people begin going from room to room. Any vehicles left in the parking lot would be noticed and a vehicle that was there day after day would stick out like a sore thumb. If somebody showed up and approached the vehicle you would pay particular attention. So I have to believe the witnesses.
Does anyone remember hearing if the computers of EA and JA revealed anything?
I believe today is the day we get an answer !
Since we all seem to have trouble believing the eye-witnesses, let's look at the science.
2 experts (one the prosecutions) said EA was only dead for 2-4 days. The prosecutions theory falls apart with this (thier own witnesses) testimony.
This fact in itself is glaring, in-your-face reasonable doubt. That fact tells this jury to come back with not guilty. If they aren't considering this fact, they aren't following the law.
POOHBEAR,
Man, that IS a tough one, but its great to see an instance where the system worked quite well...
We can all speculate on hundreds of scenarios for JA's guilt and innocence... The most abundantly clear fact about this case is that it is easy to devise theories because there wasn't enough evidence to construct one that sticks and works as the only explanation.
Pooh, your comment on lack of evidence in the tial you sat on sounds very similar to the case we are all transfixed by...
Very interesting... thanks for the well thought out and concise post.
Very helpful.
Those posts have reached a premium demand on this board.
if they look at the evidence they have to see that there isn't enough of it to convict him.
I think some of the Jurors are putting their personal views ahead of what the evidence doesn't prove.
I don't think i could live with sending Jerry to death row....
WHAT IS GOING ON this morning-Thursday- I have not been able to get any updated posts from JM-is it my computer or what??? Come on someone please tell us what is going on in the courtroom this morning
I'm sorry but I disagree with you about the death penalty. I believe that the reason it is not a deterent to crime is because there are too many appeals and it is not enforced quickly, the way it should be. Statistics might show that it is cheaper to keep a criminal alive than to execute him but I think that somebody is stacking the deck here.
When the state of North Carolina found out it would cost $300,000 to repair it's gas chamber they decided to go with Lethal Injection. I don't know the exact cost of the whole proceedure but according to their web site, The Texas Criminal Justice system gives the cost of the drugs at just over $86.00. Is it humane; well that is a question that would have to be asked of the recipient wouldn't it? I think its better than hanging, or a firing squad, which used to be the normal. It's definately an improvement over the electric chair.
I would like to ask you why we should want to be humane to someone who has murdered someone we love. Sometime they are beaten or tortured and mutilated over a period of days. Did they die right away? Was that killing humane? Did they have to suffer? I think you're going to find a lot of feedback when you start discussing the death penalty around here.
I won't go into the gorey details but back in the late 70s a 16 year old girl from Hudson, was kidnapped by two escaped convicts from the Hudson Correctional Center. She was taken to Charlotte, raped, beaten until they thought she was dead, put into the trunk of a car and driven to Alabama, and finally killed . At that time the death penalty in North Carolina had been ruled unconstitutional and they would have gotten off with life, but they made the mistake of taking her to Alabama to kill her. They have both been executed and it was well deserved.
Agreeing to disagree; that's what this great free country is all about. Wouldn't you agree? :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home