Friday, April 20, 2007 | 3:27 PM

The jury's out—of the story

Filed under: crime

About half an hour before they issued a guilty verdict, the jury in the Andre Adams trial sent a note to Judge Thomas E. Jackson. They weren’t asking for testimony to be read back or for clarification of the judge’s instructions to them.

According to Jackson, the note suggested they were worried about being confronted by family members or reporters after they announced their verdict. Contact between jurors and reporters is barred during a trial. Afterward, it’s their choice. In this case, it was unanimous.

Jackson said he didn’t think they had much to worry about— he had overseen cases where the family tension was much stronger. This case had its moments, such as a verbal confrontation between two witnesses outside the courtroom, but in all everyone was well behaved.

That said, the judge let the jurors leave first after the verdict. Everyone else was kept from leaving until the jurors had a chance to exit the building.

In light of the high stakes of the trial, I can understand the jurors’ fears. They heard testimony from people with criminal histories. They knew families and friends of the victim and defendant would read their comments in newspapers— four reporters covered this trial, including yours truly.

If I were in their situation, I might want to protect myself, too. But it’s also in my job description to want to know more. For instance, it had been up to the jury to decide (if they found him guilty) whether Adams committed first-degree or second-degree murder. They picked first-degree, and it’s possible they spent much of the more than 5 hours deciding between the two options. But we don’t know.

It feels strange to me that in the end, the thoughts that mattered most in this trial won’t be known, beyond one word: “Guilty.”

Comments | Syndication