Cocaine fact-checking costs juror $450 fine

phr

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
36,678
Location
St. Charles, IL
Cocaine fact-checking costs juror $450 fine
Sarah Ovaska
The News & Observer


RALEIGH - A regretful Wake County juror found himself on the wrong side of a law Wednesday when a Superior Court judge held him in contempt for looking up the chemical makeup of cocaine in a textbook.

Barry E. Taylor, 60, of Wake Forest, a chemist by trade, was fined $450 by Judge W. Osmond Smith III after Taylor tried to do his own research in a drug-trafficking case in which he was a juror. Smith had the option of putting Taylor in jail but decided against it.

"The judge is absolutely right," Taylor said. "I made a huge mistake."

Smith also declared a mistrial in the case of Leonel Candela Mendoza, 26, who was facing a felony charge of conspiracy to traffic drugs. The trial began Monday in the Wake County Courthouse.

Smith, using standard instructions given to most juries, told Taylor and his fellow jurors not to conduct "any independent inquiry, research or investigation into matters involved in this case."

But Taylor consulted a chemistry textbook to double-check what an expert witness had said on the stand and told his fellow jurors what he had done. At the time, he wasn't aware that he had violated Smith's instructions.

But the jury foreman told Smith, and Taylor was fined.

Taylor said he's generally a rational person and not one to defy a judge's orders.

"I apologize to the jury that I was a part of," he said. "I did a huge disservice to this defendant."

Mendoza will be given a new trial, but no date has been set. He remains in custody at the Wake County jail, where he's being held in lieu of $200,000 bail.

Link!
 
If his questions weren't answered by the presentations of either defense or prosecution, he should have just voted to acquit and saved himself $450.
 
this is stupid. It doesnt even address what the witness said and if it actually was true or not
 
I was surprised that you couldn't do what he did. I'm not sure if that's the case for every trial, or it's just specific to this one. The judge did give instructions not to do it though. :\
 
uhhh science textbooks, maybe even with relevant experts, should be readily available for any questions jurors have..........
 
^^^^ Sorry Bubba. If the prosecution says cocaine is cyanide and the defense says it's sugar, you're choosing between cyanide and sugar.

Methinks it was probably a cocaine-freebase vs. cocaine-hydrochloride issue and the judge was afraid that a chemist-juror would see through the nonsense behind that...
 
Jurors are not supposed to be experts. They are supposed to be honest, impartial men, who decide the case based on what the prosecution and defense provide. You don't like it? Get a better defense.
 
Top