Mistrial?

Recently I attended a three-day trial of a Crystal Lake woman who had been charged with four counts of misdemeanor Disorderly Conduct. The events leading to those charges occurred on four different days, and for more than a year the cases proceeded through court all scheduled on the same day.

Then, finally, the day of the start of the jury trial arrived. The very first order of business was the judge's attention to the charges, and he said they should be tried separately. That was exactly what I had been telling the defendant and advising her to talk to her lawyer about the pros and cons of trying all four at the same time.

Wouldn't the jury get confused? Wouldn't the jury think that she had to be guilty of something, or else she wouldn't be there?

The Assistant State's Attorneys wanted them tried together (naturally), and her own lawyer didn't object. From what little I could hear, it sounded like he even agreed that they should be tried together. I didn't hear him object or argue against it. So, in the absence of objection, the judge let the trial proceed.

A jury was selected, sworn in, and instructed not to discuss the case with anyone. That ended Day One.

After the case was finished and the woman was convicted on two of the charges (the judge gave a directed verdict of not guilty on one charge, and the jury found her not guilty on a second), the defendant found out that one member of the jury had recognized the name of one of the defense witnesses and had called that witness's mother the first night to ask if she had a daughter named (name withheld). The mother worked for the juror, and she said that her daughter would be testifying.

The juror's first mistake was discussing the case with someone. Given that he didn't know, for sure, that the daughter was the same person who might testify, I can see where he might have innocently thought he could inquire. After all, maybe she wasn't.

But the bigger, and fatal, mistake was not reporting the call to the judge the next morning. The judge would have reamed him out for not following instructions and dismissed him. Then another juror would have been selected, and the trial would have proceeded.

I told the convicted defendant to call her attorney immediately (again?) and discuss making a motion for a mistrial. She should not wait for sentencing date.

If her attorney doesn't immediately file for a mistrial, should she go to the courthouse and file it herself? If it were my case, I would.

What will happen next? My guess is that the judge will declare a mistrial.

And then the State will decide not to re-try the cases. It has now lost all the advantage. The defense knows how the prosecution witnesses have testified, and it knows the lies that were told under oath. The defense should have exposed the prosecution witnesses' lies through vigorous cross-examination and through presentation of a strong defense.