FAKE RONJAN!!Juror notes: trial #2 (CW: SA)
Jury selection (6/26-27)
More intense than previous trial. Probably went through 100 juror candidates to get to 12 jurors and 4 alts (of which I am alt #2). Many jurors dismissed because of the case subject matter. Both lawyers had immediate judgments about the jurors who weren't dismissed due to subject matter. We were told by the prosecutor that this will be a very intense case, and the defense attorney made it clear she would go after the victim's credibility. Defense made a point that we are not likely to see the defendant present at any point, and that is his right and we are not to infer anything from his absence. Judge expects trial to start on 7/8 and end on 7/23, with deliberations to follow.
Week one (7/8-11)
Opening statements were brief. Prosecution said the victim is an open book and has nothing to hide. Defense said the victim was not held against her will. Prosecution laid a foundation of how the victim was discovered and her subsequent examinations in the ambulance and hospital. Defense challenged and objected to the admissibility of all video evidence, but they were all eventually admitted. Victim was found naked on a residential building rooftop awning by a bystander, who notified a nearby cop. Victim had told authorities she was kidnapped and raped for five days. Clear evidence of injuries - both bruises and cuts. Dozens of photos presented to the jury. No mention yet of the defendant. On Thursday the victim briefly took the stand and pled the fifth on a few occasions (plot twist). She was open about her drug addiction and homelessness.
Haven't really slept well since trial began, and had first trial-related dream on Thursday night 7/11.
Week two (7/16 - 7/18)
One juror excused from serving, I am added to case as juror #3. Victim back on stand. Talked about conditions being held, defecating while being raped, being unable to eat due to weakness from withdrawal, and the escape out the window. On cross, victim pled the fifth to multiple questions including being accused of stabbing a long time romantic partner and stealing merchandise. Defense attorney grilled victim on her past drug use and inability to complete rehab, including the day of her prior testimony. Victim had some inconsistent responses, unclear if because unreliable or because memory from that type of event would be spotty. DNA evidence brought in showing defendant DNA present in vulval, vaginal, and anal swabs (1 in 8.15 quadrillion odds of it not being a match). No identifiable DNA present on metal pipes or handcuffs. Lead detective brought on to connect the dots about the investigation.
Week three (7/22 - 7/24)
Lead detective cross examined, lots of focus on exactly which cameras were used and when those requests came in. Additional camera owners brought in to vouch for accuracy of their footage. Defendant mug shot from a prior arrest presented into evidence. Arresting officer testified about the apprehension process. Computer forensic detective testified to evidence including text messages referencing location, photos of Torah and Quran passages justifying behavior, and evidence of positive ID. Defendant showed up on last day when prosecution rested their case, with court officers standing right behind him as a precaution. He testified via direct statement after a bizarre demand that he not be asked questions by his own lawyer. Court officer instructed jury that if at any point we hear her say "jury GO" we are to run out of the courtroom and leave our belongings. Defendant claims to have been involuntarily intoxicated for the full duration of the kidnapping, and denies being the person we see on surveillance video, and claims no knowledge of the location of the crime or the location of his arrest as well as any objects involved. Lengthy cross by prosecutor because defendant took the stand.
Week four (7/30 - 7/31)
Two more jurors excused from serving, so we are subbing in two of our three remaining alternates. Closing statements for both sides. Defense hammered victim's credibility on her drug use, inconsistent storytelling, and outstanding warrants. Defense criticized police handling of evidence and investigation, drawing attention to evidence that was not swabbed for DNA. Slight shift in story from victim looking for a bargain to prosecution not having enough evidence due to a shoddy investigation. No real mention of defendant's testimony. Prosecution told the story start to finish of first meeting of victim and defendant to them arriving at the crime scene. Characterized the defendant as a hunter who picked his target deliberately. Argued that the metal bar is forced coercion which indicates guilt for anal and vaginal rape. Argued that intent is the actions, which included physical assault and tying the victim up, holding her naked while withdrawing. Closed by acknowledging mistakes by the police and detectives but asking us to focus on the evidence.
Began deliberations. Agreed on kidnapping and rape guilty verdicts on day one after roughly 30 minutes. Had a nightmare about the case afterwards, with Damon being abducted and seeing it on surveillance camera. Finished deliberations in afternoon of day 2, guilty of kidnapping, 5 counts of rape, and attempted sex trafficking.