Jury System

Subterms

    Latest story

    175 Shares32 Views

    A Jury Is Set for the Trial of Daniel Penny, Accused in Subway Killing

    by

    Lawyers selected 12 Manhattanites and four alternates to hear a manslaughter case that divided the city. Opening statements will be Friday.A jury of 12 Manhattanites has been chosen to decide the fate of Daniel Penny, a Long Island man who put a homeless man in a fatal chokehold on a subway car last year.Mr. Penny, 26, faces charges of manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide in the May 2023 death of Jordan Neely, who had a history of mental illness and who Mr. Penny said had been threatening passengers.The jurors and four alternates, who Justice Maxwell T. Wiley ruled would be kept anonymous, include a cross section of residents from across the borough, including Chelsea, Hell’s Kitchen, Washington Heights and Harlem.On Friday, those jurors will hear the lawyers explain in opening arguments their conceptions of a case that divided New York City as soon as a video of Mr. Penny, who is white, restraining Mr. Neely, who was Black, rocketed around the internet. Some New Yorkers saw Mr. Penny’s actions on the F train as criminal. Others saw him as a champion for frightened riders.Jury selection, which began last week, was contentious. Screening more than 100 prospective jurors, the first step in a criminal trial, took nearly two weeks and at times set off arguments between the lawyers.The defense, led by Mr. Penny’s lawyer Thomas A. Kenniff, hired a jury consultant who has worked with a wide spectrum of defendants, including the president of Brazil, Kyle Rittenhouse and O.J. Simpson. The consultant, Jo-Ellan Dimitrius, was in court with Mr. Penny’s legal team throughout the two weeks, taking notes and making suggestions.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      California Drug Clinic Operator Convicted in $3 Million Kickback Scheme

      by

      Casey Mahoney, 48, of Los Angeles, illegally paid “body brokers” to lure clients, a federal jury found.A California man who operated addiction treatment facilities in Orange County was convicted this week of paying nearly $3 million in illegal kickbacks for referrals of patients to his facilities, according to federal prosecutors.From at least October 2018 until December 2020, the man, Casey Mahoney, 48, of Los Angeles, paid about $2.87 million to “so-called ‘body brokers’” who gave thousands of dollars to patients to coax them into Healing Path Detox L.L.C. in Huntington Beach and Get Real Recovery Inc. in San Juan Capistrano, two treatment centers Mr. Mahoney operated, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California said in a statement on Friday.Some of the money that the body brokers gave to patients was used by the patients to buy drugs, the department’s statement said.After a nine-day trial, a federal jury in Los Angeles found Mr. Mahoney guilty on Wednesday of one count of conspiracy related to offering illegal remunerations for patient referrals, seven counts of illegal remunerations for patient referrals and three counts of money laundering, prosecutors said. He was acquitted on one count of aiding and assisting the preparation of a false tax document.The money-laundering charges, the most serious on which Mr. Mahoney was convicted, each carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. Sentencing is set for Jan. 17, 2025.Treatment facility operators may pay a group like a marketer or an advertiser to promote their services to patients. But the Eliminating Kickbacks in Recovery Act of 2018 prevents the operators from paying body brokers kickbacks based on how much revenue the patients they referred brought in, as Mr. Mahoney did, according to the indictment.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Before the Alec Baldwin Trial’s End, 2 Jurors Had Doubts About His Guilt

      by

      When the judge threw out the case, the jurors said, they had doubts that Mr. Baldwin was guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting of the cinematographer on the set of the film “Rust.”When the judge threw out the involuntary manslaughter case against Alec Baldwin earlier this month after finding that the prosecution had withheld evidence that could have helped his defense, it left key questions that have hung over the case for more than two years unresolved.But two members of the jury who spoke about the case publicly for the first time on Saturday said in interviews that they had been far from convinced — given the evidence they had heard before the trial was brought to its abrupt end — that Mr. Baldwin was guilty of involuntary manslaughter for the fatal shooting of a cinematographer on a film set.“As the week went by, it just didn’t, it didn’t seem like a very strong case,” Johanna Haag, known to the court as juror No. 7, said in a phone interview on Saturday.Gabriela Picayo, who was identified in court documents as juror No. 9, said that she too had been having serious doubts about the case against Mr. Baldwin before it was dismissed.A critical moment for her during the trial, she said, was when she learned that the armorer who had loaded a live round into the gun that day, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, had already been convicted of involuntary manslaughter. “I’m still here, I’m still open to hearing and obviously trying to stay unbiased,” Ms. Picayo said of her thinking at the time, “but I was starting to move towards the direction of thinking that this was very silly and he should not be on trial.”The trial centered on what happened on Oct. 21, 2021, when Mr. Baldwin was rehearsing on the set of the film “Rust” in New Mexico with a gun that he had been told was “cold” — meaning that it should have contained no live ammunition — when it suddenly fired a bullet that killed Halyna Hutchins, the movie’s cinematographer.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      U.K. Nurse Lucy Letby Convicted of Attempted Murder in Retrial

      by

      Ms. Letby, who was previously found guilty in a string of murders and attempted murders, was retried and found guilty of another attempted murder.Lucy Letby, a neonatal nurse who was convicted last year of murdering seven babies and attempting to kill six others at the English hospital where she worked, was found guilty on Tuesday of the attempted murder of another premature baby.A jury had initially failed to reach a verdict in the case of the child, known as Baby K to protect her identity, and Ms. Letby was retried over the last four weeks in a court in Manchester in the north of England. She will be sentenced on Friday and is already serving a life term for the earlier convictions.Ms. Letby, 34, was working at the Countess of Chester Hospital in the city of Chester, in northwestern England, between June 2015 and June 2016 when an unexpectedly high number of babies in the neonatal unit where she worked died or became seriously unwell.Nicola Wyn Williams, a senior crown prosecutor, said that while Ms. Letby had “continually denied that she tried to kill this baby or any of the babies that she has been convicted of murdering or attempting to murder,” the jury had “formed its own view.”“The grief that the family of Baby K have felt is unimaginable,” she said. “Our thoughts remain with them and all those affected by this case at this time.” More

    • 63 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Donald Trump and American Justice

      by

      Readers offer a range of reactions and reflections.To the Editor:Re “Guilty: Jury Convicts Trump on All 34 Counts” (front page, May 31):I was overcome with a sense of giddiness on Thursday afternoon as I walked through Manhattan and news broke that former President Donald Trump had been convicted on 34 felony counts.I was glued to the live news updates on my phone, and soon enough messages began pouring in from like-minded friends who shared my sense of satisfaction that the justice system is alive and well, and that the verdict showed us that no one is above the law.Nonetheless, it took mere minutes before a more sober reality set in, and I contemplated how the verdict will likely play into the strategic hands of Mr. Trump’s campaign, energizing his ardent supporters, perhaps even working in his favor among some sympathetic swing voters.That so many of us find that morally offensive and reprehensible, while so many of our fellow Americans simply do not, reaffirms how deeply and dangerously divided this country truly is.Cody LyonBrooklynTo the Editor:Our system of laws has spoken. A jury of his peers found Donald Trump guilty on all counts in what was supposed to be the weakest of the criminal cases against the former president.Unfortunately, our Constitution does not prohibit a convicted felon from running for president; it even allows an elected candidate who has been criminally convicted to govern, even from prison.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 38 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Donald Trump, culpable

      by

      [Ahora también estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos]El jueves, en un humilde juzgado del Bajo Manhattan, el expresidente y actual abanderado republicano fue declarado culpable de 34 delitos graves de falsificación de registros comerciales. La decisión del jurado, y los hechos presentados en el juicio, ofrecen otro recordatorio —quizás el más crudo hasta la fecha— de las muchas razones por las que Donald Trump no es apto para ocupar el cargo.El veredicto de culpabilidad en el caso del pago a cambio de silencio del expresidente fue emitido por un jurado unánime de 12 neoyorquinos elegidos al azar, que consideró que Trump, el muy posible candidato a la presidencia por el Partido Republicano, era culpable de falsificar registros comerciales para evitar que los votantes se enteraran de un encuentro sexual que él creía que habría sido políticamente perjudicial.Los estadounidenses pueden preguntarse sobre la importancia de este momento. La Constitución no prohíbe que las personas con una condena penal sean elegidas o ejerzan de comandante en jefe, aunque estén tras las rejas. Los fundadores de la nación dejaron esa decisión en manos de los votantes. Muchos expertos también han expresado su escepticismo sobre la importancia de este caso y sus fundamentos jurídicos, que se basó en una teoría legal inusual para buscar un cargo de delito grave por lo que es más comúnmente un delito menor, y Trump sin duda buscará una apelación.Sin embargo, lo mejor de este caso sórdido es la prueba de que el imperio de la ley obliga a todos, incluso a los expresidentes. En circunstancias extraordinarias, el juicio se desarrolló como cualquier otro juicio penal en la ciudad. El hecho de que 12 estadounidenses pudieran juzgar al expresidente y posible futuro presidente es una muestra notable de los principios democráticos que los estadounidenses aprecian.El juez Juan Merchan, el jurado y el sistema judicial neoyorquino impartieron justicia con celeridad, proporcionando a los estadounidenses información vital sobre un candidato presidencial antes de que comience la votación. Varias encuestas han demostrado que la condena afectará la decisión de muchos votantes.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      The Jury That Convicted Donald Trump

      by

      As the 12 jurors entered into the courtroom to deliver the verdict against Donald J. Trump, 11 of them looked ahead. But one looked in the direction of the defendant.At that moment, the juror knew what was about to happen. Mr. Trump did not.Moments later, the foreman would read the verdict convicting Mr. Trump of all 34 counts of falsifying business records with which he had been charged, making him the first American president to become a felon.The jurors — seven men and five women — remained expressionless as they were individually polled to confirm the verdict, even as Mr. Trump looked at them.Justice Juan M. Merchan then thanked them for their service, and then they filed out, going directly past Mr. Trump, who kept his eyes downcast as they walked by.Before they left, Justice Merchan told them they were free to discuss the case if they so pleased, but no juror has yet spoken to the news media. Because of the sensitivity of the case, their identities were kept secret to all, except the lawyers in the case, and the defendant. As news that the jury had reached a verdict spread beyond the courthouse, uniformed officers and sergeants standing outside could be seen speaking furtively to one another, as the whirring of helicopter blades droned on overhead.Parts of Columbus Park behind the courthouse were blocked off to reporters, with court officers scolding some that they risked tampering with the jury by being so close.The jurors piled into black vans with tinted windows that zipped north along Baxter Street, cutting against traffic as they zoomed away from the courthouse, and the first conviction of an American president.Molly Cook EscobarMolly Cook EscobarMolly Cook EscobarMolly Cook EscobarMolly Cook Escobar More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Judge’s Instructions Will Be a Road Map for Jury Weighing Trump’s Fate

      by

      Within about an hour, a Manhattan jury will begin a discussion of historic import: determining whether Donald J. Trump is guilty of 34 felonies.But before the jurors begin to deliberate, the judge, Juan M. Merchan, will deliver legal instructions that will help guide the 12 New Yorkers who will hash out Mr. Trump’s fate.Justice Merchan will describe the legal meaning of the word “intent” and the concept of the presumption of innocence. He will remind the jurors that they pledged to set any biases aside against the former president before they were sworn in, and that Mr. Trump’s decision not to testify cannot be held against him.Then, according to a person with knowledge of the instructions that Justice Merchan plans to deliver, he will explain the 34 charges of falsifying business records that Mr. Trump faces. It will likely be the most important guidance that the judge offers during the trial. And it is no simple task.In New York, falsifying records is a misdemeanor, unless the documents were faked to hide another crime. The other crime, prosecutors say, was Mr. Trump’s 2016 violation of state election law that prohibited conspiring to aid a political campaign using “unlawful means.”Those means, prosecutors argue, could include any of a menu of other crimes. And so each individual false-records charge that Mr. Trump faces contains within it multiple possible crimes that jurors must strive to understand.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Arizona Rancher Accused of Killing Migrant Won’t Be Retried After Mistrial

      by

      George Alan Kelly was accused of murdering Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea, an unarmed migrant from Mexico, on his 170-acre ranch in Kino Springs, Ariz., last year.Prosecutors in Arizona said on Monday that they would not retry a rancher who was charged with murdering an unarmed migrant on his property last year after a mistrial was declared last week.Jurors were not able to reach a unanimous verdict in the case against George Kelly, 75, who fatally shot at Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea, 48, on his 170-acre ranch in Kino Springs, Ariz., after Mr. Cuen-Buitimea crossed the U.S.-Mexico border in January 2023. Judge Thomas Fink of Santa Cruz County Superior Court declared a mistrial on April 22.The Santa Cruz District Attorney’s Office said in a statement on Monday that “because of the unique circumstances and challenges surrounding” the case, Mr. Kelly would not be retried.“However, our office’s decision in this case should not be construed as a position on future cases of this type,” the office said. “Our office is mandated by statute to prosecute criminal acts, and we take that statutory mandate seriously.”Brenna Larkin, a lawyer for Mr. Kelly, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Monday.Ms. Larkin said last week that there had been a hung jury in the case, and that the final count had been 7-1 in favor of finding Mr. Kelly not guilty.Mr. Cuen-Buitimea was part of a group of undocumented migrants who were crossing the high desert in Kino Springs, Ariz., near the border with Mexico on Jan. 30, 2023, when they were spotted by Border Patrol and fled, according to the authorities. Mr. Cuen-Buitimea and another man, Daniel Ramirez, ran onto Mr. Kelly’s ranch, which is when Mr. Kelly fired an AK-47-style rifle at them, the authorities said.Mr. Cuen-Buitimea was struck in the back and died, law enforcement officials said.Mr. Kelly was charged in February 2023 with one count of second-degree murder and two counts of aggravated assault.The case emboldened immigration critics and conservative ranchers, who said that Mr. Kelly had been a victim, while others were horrified by the shooting.Ms. Larkin said in court documents that Mr. Kelly had been eating lunch the day of the shooting when he and his wife saw several men armed with rifles near his home.“Mr. Kelly responded by firing several warning shots over the heads of the group,” she wrote in court documents.Michael Jette, a deputy Santa Cruz County attorney, said during closing arguments on April 18 that Mr. Kelly had fired his gun “without verbal warning, without a shout, without any indication,” The Associated Press reported.Before the case went to trial in March, Mr. Kelly rejected a plea agreement that would have reduced the charges to one count of negligent homicide. More