Seating the Jury

The jury selection process was the order of business in day 2 of the USA v. Miller, et al. Court began at 1:00 p.m. The jurors had filled out a questionaire the previous day. The 56 person pool was narrowed to 42 people whose names were called by the court clerk. Of the initial 42 potential jurors, 27 are women, 15 are men. The remaining 14 sat in the observation area with me.

The side of the courtroom is divided by an aisle. The Government is to the left of the aisle, along with the jury box. The defendants are on the right side of the aisle. The choice of which side to sit on can be assumed as 'support' of one side or the other. When the jury pool returned from a break, they all filled the left side of the observation area (where I sat) and almost begrudgingly filled the right side.

For the better part of the afternoon, Judge Julie Robinson questioned the jurors about whether they had served on a jury before (including any civil matters against banks. Interestingly, this was the only question in which none of the potential jurors raised their hand), their prior criminal or civil history, among other things.

Many of the jurors had previous jury experience. None had been forepersons on those juries. Those jurors' previous cases included:

Criminal murder case: Result: Acquittal

Criminal drug case: Result: Conviction

Criminal drug case: Result: Conviction

Criminal drug case: Result: Conviction

Criminal DUI case: Result: Conviction

Kidnapping case: Result: Conviction

On a few occasions, Judge Robinson excused a juror due to answers given, such as financial hardship over the course of the trial from loss of income. One juror explained that he had a close relationship with Court prosecutors due to his sitting through a murder trial of his nephew. He was unsure whether he could be impartial. When the judge would excuse a juror, the clerk would then call the next name of the 14 remaining jury pool members.

The 42 were then given a sheet and asked to stand and tell the Court about their education, job, marital and family status, hobbies, favorite TV shows, military history, and what clubs they belonged to. This took the longest part of the day as some of the members spoke at length.

Mr. Vanatta remains in custody. He enters and leaves the courtroom with law enforcement officers. The two officers sit 3 feet away from Vanatta during the court proceedings. Mr. Vanatta clearly struggles to keep up with reviewing jury questionaires unlike the other defendants who are free pending the outcome of this trial.

Hallie Irvin sits across from Mr. Vanatta. They continue to chat and exchange notes throughout the day.

Samantha Harris has no conversation with her tablemate, F. Jeffrey Miller. Harris's attorney sits between the two.

I am unsure whether the jurors have yet to identify Miller. He is better dressed than his lawyers and appears to be an attorney.

There is a jury consultant in the court room. Aside from myself, he was the only non-jury pool member in the observation area of the courtroom. One of Miller's attorneys', Mr. Bradshaw, appears to be bothered by my presence in the courtroom. On Monday, he approached me in the courtroom. I told him I was simply there to observe the trial. On Tuesday, at one point Mr. Bradshaw 'squared his chair' towards me.

Court is not in session today, Wednesday, November 19th.

On Thursday, court will reconvene at 9 am. The attorneys will be allowed to ask further questions of the 42. In case of conflict, the remaining 14 are required to return to court as well. Then, the jury members will be selected.

The opening statements are much anticipated. Judge Robinson says they will begin mid-morning on Thursday.

-article by field reporter, Anne Mitchell, Crazy Fish Realty