The Hanged Juror: Recent Comments

Comment on Law and Disorder, Spread the Wealth, and Kristallnacht

The Hanged Juror — 2011-08-21T10:37:55Z

Dear Voice of Sanity,

This time I can't agree with you. Casey Anthony was not "proved guilty," but that does not make her an innocent. The prosecution proved nothing but the charges that she lied to investigators. It is those lies that condemn her in my eyes as having had what legal eagles call "a consciousness of guilt." What she felt guilty about is pretty obvious: the death of her child. Had she not lied and covered up the child's death for so many weeks before the remains were found, you might be able to say she had nothing to do with it. As it stands, it is obvious that at a minimum she felt some responsibility for her child's death (accidental though it may have been). This sense of responsibility led her to accuse an entirely innocent and uninvolved person of kidnapping. Had the prosecutors charged her with child neglect and false accusations (if there is such a crime) she would have been found guilty.

Comment on Law and Disorder, Spread the Wealth, and Kristallnacht

The Hanged Juror — 2011-08-21T10:30:03Z

"But Casey Anthony was never anything more than a disturbed girl who neglected or abused her child to death and then tried to cover it up."

No, she's actually innocent. The prosecution proved that. It's the only explanation that makes sense.

Posted for the VOS (Voice of Sanity)

Comment on An appalling jury foreman in the O.J. Simpson trial

Paul Connelly — 2011-04-07T01:32:49Z

Yes, I know the way you may have read an abstract of print that the media wanted to print. Odd as it sounds, on my original jury questioner they asked what my thought was of the media. My answer: The media is a business trying to sell a product, they will twist a story in any way to make it interesting enough to sell. So as you stated again that you have read my statement several times, the reading does not give the tone of the courtroom of which the interview was held. It clearly does not show the reporter interrupting my answer to the question of what my opinion was as it pertained to sentencing of the current trial. So I beg of you before you watch a clipped and edited newscast or read a clipped and edited article please watch the interview in its entirety as shown on you tube under the title of "OJ Simpson Jury speaks out" it is a little less than an hour long. I can speak of the media and their antics because in all the televised interviews I have been in, not one with the exception of Dr. Phil has played the interview as it happened or with out cutting and pasting thecomments where they better served the purpose of making it interesting. So please, understand that regardless of how you may of read a statement, please consider that what you read is not always what was said, and certainly not always what was meant. Consider this. Do you really think any of us jurors would go on national television and say something to give cause of a retrial? That would be silly. So please watch the interview in real time and consider thecommotion in the interview and then listen very closely to all my answer. After I say "that was my opinion" I go on saying "that it is up to the court and the judge to decide" that last quote is the part the media outlets have omitted from my answer. The Judge who denied the retrial, heard it from video and denied the request for retrial. The Nevada Supreme Court Judges did the same and denied the retrial. Of course these are also people who know how media outlets cut and paste to make it interesting. Unless one was there or unless one dares to watch the unedited interview, they will always only believe what the media prints or airs after editing. I also have a full printed transcript of thecomplete interview as it happened that clearly states me finishing the question as it pertained to the current trial only. I said in my original questionnaire that my opinion of his earlier trial was that he received a trial and that trial netted an oucome of not guilty. I believed it when I answered the question and I believe it now. You can see my questionnaire on line as well.

Sorry I assumed that you were a MR. I meant no disrespect in that.

Paul Connelly

Comment on An appalling jury foreman in the O.J. Simpson trial

The Hanged Juror — 2011-04-05T18:41:16Z

Mr. Connelly, I am a Ms. not a Mr. and a blogger (opinionated nincompoop), not a journalist who has to get my facts straight. Even after reading your "correction" of my objection to a statement I heard you make on TV and read in news articles, I still think it sounds as if you're saying that in your opinion Simpson should have been convicted of murder.

I still think Simpson is a thug who thought he could barge into a hotel room and reclaim items he thought were his, on his own, without the police, but I don't think he committed kidnapping, and I am certain that judges throughout the U.S. are diminishing the very heinous crime of kidnapping by using it to increase jail time. When I was on a jury in a case where the judge did that, we saw through the ploy and convicted on the reasonable assault charges. I would have convicted Simpson on armed robbery and assault, not kidnapping.

And, as I said, I've read your comment several times now, and I don't think you realize what you really said.

Comment on An appalling jury foreman in the O.J. Simpson trial

Juror 3 foreman — 2011-04-02T01:39:34Z

For having a PH.D. in any subject you would think one would know to gather all facts prior to forming an opinion or for that matter, printing their opinion. The jury foreman was answering a question as to what he thought the sentence should be in the current trial. As the foreman was answering with "that is up to the judge and the court to decide. It is not up to this panel of jurors" The reporter pressed on with saying,"many people are of the impression that OJ Simpson should have been found guilty and sentenced to life in prison 13 years ago and that surely every one has opinion on this case" The jury foreman answered with (in answering the part of the statement that everyone has an opinion)"and that was my opinion...that it is up to the court and the jury to decide" You can clearly hear all thatcomment on the you tube interview filmed in it's real time. As for the foreman deciding to press on in to the night on the 13th anniversary. Not a single juror had a clue as to the significance of the day. Certainly the defense attorneys did and they could have postponed closing arguments another day as they should have been aware of their clients previous trials. We had no idea that it was the 13th day of the trial, we deliberated 13 hours and it was the 13th anniversary of his famous trial. He alsocommitted the latest crimes on the 13th of September the year prior. My original juror summons number was 32 which is his jersey number as he was also once jailed here in Vegas in cell 32. Is this my fault? I kept the jury way in to the evening because we had already deliberated the verdicts of Mr. Simpson, and we needed to now decide the verdicts of Mr. Stewart. By allowing the jury to go home for the evening would leave a big risk of the already decided verdict of Simpson being leaked out to the media, and thus creating a potential new trial or perhaps even a flight risk. As for no black jurors on this trial. 18 jurors sat through this trial. Juror #13 is an African American male and juror#17 is an African American female. The judge wanted to do a lottery of sorts to decide the 12 deliberating jurors. This method would have certainly given one of the African American jurors a chance to deliberate. However, the defense lawyers did not want the lottery as they asked the judge to have jurors 1 - 12 as the jury and 13 - 18 as alternates. This would allow a "guaranteed" appeal if the verdicts came back as guilty all the defense team had to say was that there were no blacks on the jury. Of course, had we, the jury came back with "NOT GUILTY" verdicts then we would not be raising the question of race and then jurors 13 and 18 may as well been white as well. So please Mr. PH.D. get your facts straight before you print articles that you know little or nothing about. I do not have a PH.D. and I shall not have to explain that to you.

Paul Connelly
Juror # 3 Foreman

Comment on More about Transgender Murder Statistics

The Hanged Juror — 2010-11-18T12:06:34Z

Obession? What should "they" ask? "Is it human?"

Thank you for your interest in my blog and your input. But I believe that this issue (ie, transgenders as the target of more hate and victims of more murderers) than other groups or individuals is phony. I'm sorry, but I don't believe it. I'm convinced that Jews, Rawandans, Christian Sudanese, Croatians, etc. have been slaughtered in far greater numbers and in far greater percentages of the world population than transgenders in the West, especially in America.

My interest is in the U.S. criminal court system and juries. So I'm shutting off comments on this thread.

Comment on More about Transgender Murder Statistics

Joann Prinzivalli — 2010-11-17T14:40:24Z

Regarding China, there is a citationless Wikipedia entry on the subject of "transgender in China" at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_in_China

googling: transsexual china
This results in many hits.

Trans people as hated group: One can check Right Wing Watch to find numerous U.S. based organizations that advocate against transgender people. In Iran, even though there is popular anti-trans sentiment, because of a fatwa by the Ayatollah Khomenei, GRS is provided by the government(unfortunately, they also perform the same surgery on gays to make them straight, as an alternative to being stoned to death in a stadium, so Iran does not exactly get brownie points).

Trans murderscome in several types. A good number are acquaintance murders. Others are murders of sex workers. Some, such as Latiesha Green's 2009 murder in Syracuse, New York, can be attributed to anti-gay, anti-trans bigotry.

One more thought on acquaintance murders - some occur when acquaintances discover that the individual is trans. (The popular conception is that they are enraged about being "deceived." But being trans is not a deception).

Sports: Jeannie Longo has long dominated women's bicycle racing, and she is not trans. A number of sports organizations have developed criteria for allowing trans women tocompete as women, based on the assessment that after a couple of years post surgery and on HRT, muscle mass, etc. is within the female range.

The designation of sex is not exactly the easiest thing, even though the simple visual examination of a newborn's external genitalia results in a correct designation more than 99% of the time. When someone falls in the gray area, whether they are genitally intersex, or have an intersex brain development, the designation requires assessment of factors other than birth genital shape or the shape of the 23rd chromosome pair. Sports organizations do take this seriously. If you have an issue with trans women in women's sports, where do you draw the line? Caster Semenya, who is genitally intersex? Maybe any woman who is "too good" - like Jeannie Longo - should be banned?

Obsession: what is the first question people ask when a baby is born? That;s right, "Is it a boy or a girl?"

Comment on More about Transgender Murder Statistics

The Hanged Juror — 2010-11-17T13:54:06Z

One flaw in your logic is assuming that the population of transgenders is evenly distributed in the world. Some cultures, such as the Chinese (a very large part of the world population) do not tolerate transgenders, and as a consequence even if a person believes himself or herself to be burdened with the wrong set of genitalia, he or she could never come out of the closet. Since your premise is that straight people hate transgenders and therefore tend to murder them more frequently than other types of people, in China at least the hatred would go to waste. The straights wouldn't know who was transgender and who was not.

I also can't fathom why you're so adamant that transenders are such a hated group that they attract killers. Presumably you also think their killers are hateful straights. What do you hope to change by convincing me that transgenders are endangered?

It seems to me that the most dangerous person in a transgender's life is his or her sexual partner, especially if you're using the Andrade case as an example. This would make sense. After all, a lot of people think that the leading cause of death among pregnant women is murder (by their partner). This, of course, isn't true, either. What is true is that most murders of all sorts are committed by someone the victim knows.

So, it follows that trangenders must also be murdered by people they know more often than not. And if transgenders are actually murdered more often than other people (straight or not), then it's likely they are choosing their acquaintances poorly.

I can't say I have no complaints against transgenders, because I do feel that women who are born as men and then choose to modify their bodies have advantages over women who are born with women's bodies. Tennis player Rene Richards is an example. In fact anyone raised with the privileges of a male who then grows up to compete against women who did not have that advantage are, in my opinion, exploiting our misogynist society.

On the other hand, I have no interest in anybody's sexual practices but my own. Everyone should be entitled to privacy.

I just can't understand why this issue is even controversial. I think there must be a deep psychological reason for this obsession with transgenders and murder. I'd like to hear what a psychologist has to say about it.

Comment on More about Transgender Murder Statistics

Joann Prinzivalli — 2010-11-16T16:26:26Z

Let's see if I can provide a statistical estimate:

Last year (11/20/2008-11/20/2009), the worldwidecompilation of transgender murders from the two lists I have as sources, the American list maintained by Ethan St. Pierre, and the morecomprehensive worldwide list maintained by TGEU, there were 166 reported murders of transgender individuals.

Estimates of the transgender population range from 1/10,000 (MTF) to 1/30,000 (FTM) - let's estimate 1/17.000 overall.

6 billion people in the world - That gives us around 350,000 trans people worldwide.

Reported murders may be only the tip of the iceberg - one rule of thumb is to use 10% - making the 2009 TDOR statistic the equivalent of possibly 1,660 murders in one year. This results in an annual murder statistic of about 0.44%. If we estimate that 20% of worldwide murders are actually reported, it's more like 0.22% per year.

Life span for trans individuals skews short. Let's estimate 50 years. If 1/500 is killed each year, thatcomes out to about 1 in 10 that can expect to be murdered during their lifetime.

Obviously, with the exception of the one datum of the 166 reported murders for the period (this year will also have more than 160, but the final numbers will be reported by TGEU on 11/19), it's all fuzzy data based on estimates and assumptions - but it's not terribly unrealistic. I am sure that there are people who can make a more reliable estimate - and if that 1 in 12 figure is stated as "an estimated" 1 in 12, it may not be accurate but it's somewhere in the ballpark.

Comment on South Carolina v Rye--This Juror is Horrified by Police Thuggery

bill g — 2010-02-17T16:37:02Z

I saw a couple of hours of the prosecution's cross examination of Mr. Rye, and I was struck by how credible he seemed.
When a prosecutor cross examines a defendant, the defendant almost always looks pretty bad. This was not the case with the SC v. Rye case and I think that the right decision was to exonerate the defendant.