What I have to say about jury deliberations in the Spector trial is purely speculative. I haven’t even had an opportunity to hear or read what any of the jurors said after the trial, other than the jury foreperson who said, "It just is a painful decision…. For anybody in our shoes, you have no idea. …It's tough to be on a jury"(according to Telegraph.co.uk).

I predicted the jury would “quibble” over the difference between second-degree murder and manslaughter. I now suspect that this was the issue that took up most of their time (about 30 hours spread over many days due to delays).

Judge Larry Fidler added the “lesser and included charge” of manslaughter, even though the prosecution in both trials charged Spector with second-degree murder. As I recall from the first trial, the judge stated then that he thought the lesser charge was justified by the evidence (I believe this was in response to the pro-forma defense motion to dismiss charges after the prosecution rested its case). That was a wise decision, since I believe that is what permitted the jurors to overcome some doubts during deliberations about whether or not the victim, Lana Clarkson, could have killed herself. (Perhaps Judge Fidler belongs on my soon-to-be inaugurated blogroll of judges.)

Here’s what I mean. In the first trial, the jury had only a binary guilty-or-not decision to make. However, for jurors with either extreme scruples against condemning a fellow citizen to what amounts to a life sentence or extremely logical minds (an engineer), the possibility that the victim committed suicide was a reasonable doubt.

In the second trial, the jury had three options, including guilty of manslaughter (that is, accidental killing). That took the psychological pressure off the jury a bit—just enough for them to say that the idea of suicide really wasn’t all that reasonable. After all, Ms. Clarkson had no idea that Spector had guns in his house: ergo she did not go there to kill herself. Second, Spector clearly removed the gun from the scene after the bullet was fired and clearly cleaned it at bit: this was hardly the act of man in a state of shock because his “date” had killed herself.

Having dismissed suicide as a reasonable doubt, the jury then had to decide whether the killing was intentional or accidental. This was no simple decision to make. (Again, this is my speculation, but it is what I would have done were I on the jury.)

This is why defense attorneys dislike “lesser and included charges.” They feel that giving jurors an option for lesser charges makes it easier for them to find a defendant guilty of something. And I agree with them. However, the Spector case demonstrates to me that juries don’t simply “compromise” with each other by choosing the lesser of two verdicts.

“Lesser and included charges” make it easier for a jury to reach a verdict they believe is reasonable.