Blagojevich jury: 11 women, one man

Submitted by Matt on Tue, 2011-06-28 22:20

Article here. I am not saying that the verdict was wrong. The point of this post is that there was once a time people complained vehemently at the lack of women in juries because any woman put on trial would undoubtedly have a gender bias against her since all or most of the jurors were men. In this case, a man faced 11 women and one man. Why didn't the attorneys take the oft-heard principle that juries should be representative of the population of eligible jurors in mind when choosing this jury? They could not find five more men to be seated as jurors in this trial? Excerpt:

'This time, there was no holdout juror.

It may have taken parts of 10 days to talk through the counts, but a federal jury of 11 women and one man on Monday overwhelmingly convicted former Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

In the end, they found him guilty on 17 out of 20 counts, including fraud, extortion and bribery.

One juror who wanted to acquit the ex-governor said she couldn’t ignore the mountain of evidence facing him.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

If you look up the statistics you will find a higher rate of conviction for males with a skewed jury towards the female. Meaning that if a man goes to court he should have six women, and six men as his juror, and the same for any woman that goes to court. The court system knows this, and uses it to oppress the males of this country. I mean not enough jobs, people are tired of dying for someone else's profit at our expense, and equality should not just be a dream.

David A. DeLong

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by David A. DeLong on Thu, 2011-06-30 18:06