Chapter 11 - A Polite Day of Deliberations

 

“This is a safe space, just get it out however it comes out.”

Juror 16 (Foreperson of the jury)

 

On Friday, June 21st, the twelve of us who had been retained as deliberating jurors began arriving at the courthouse around 8:30 a.m.

I forgot to mention in the last chapter that right after Mr. Calfo completed his rebuttal closing argument, Judge Phelps announced that two of the fourteen of us had been selected as alternates all along. As she started to say that, my heart raced, and I thought: "Don’t be me, don’t be me." I had come so far with the case and had formed definite opinions, so I really wanted to see the process through.

Judge Phelps read a series of instructions for the two jurors she was about to name. She said that even though they were being released now, they were still under the court's orders not to talk about the case. They were not to research the case or watch the news. They had to remain ready to rejoin the jury if something happened where one of the twelve selected couldn't fulfill their duty. I was on pins and needles until she announced that jurors 10 and 14 were the two randomly preselected alternates. I was relieved, yet simultaneously nervous about what would come next.

Juror 10 was the gentleman who sat right next to me in the jury box for the entire trial. I liked Juror 10. He was quiet but incredibly attentive to all the testimony. I had no idea where he might have been leaning on guilt versus innocence, but I knew there were many times during the trial when he, like me, would put down his notebook when a prosecution witness went on and on. His body language made me think we might be of like mind, but then again, I thought that about many of the jurors, and boy, was I wrong.

Juror 14 was someone I spent a good amount of time talking to over the past several weeks. She was about the same age as me, and we bonded over job travails and kids moving away from the house. For whatever reason, I had a sense that she would have fallen on the not guilty side of things, but I have absolutely no concrete reason for why I felt that way. I had a lot of respect for #14, and I saw her as a strong leader. Throughout the trial, I knew we would need to pick one of us to act as the foreperson, and I anticipated that she would be a great choice to lead our deliberations. Hearing Judge Phelps call her number to be placed on standby as an alternate was quite disappointing to me. I was very anxious to hear how she saw things, and I knew we would never get that chance.

So, the twelve of us remaining arrived that Friday morning, and as we gathered before heading upstairs, I remember there being chit-chat about nervous excitement to finally get to talk about this case.

The bailiff came to get us right before 9 a.m., and she led us upstairs where we waited for a few more minutes for a juror to arrive. As we waited in the hallway, I was standing next to Anthony, and I noticed a tattoo he had. I asked him about it, and as he lifted his shirt sleeve to show me the entire tattoo, I noticed it was a scripture, and he described how that scripture was important to him as a man of faith. I expressed that I shared in that belief, and then I proceeded to show what I have on my arm. I similarly have a scripture written on my arm:

 

I stood there and described to Anthony how I had Psalm 40 scratched into my arm in the handwriting of Bono. U2 has a famous song called "40," which is essentially a word-for-word reciting of the scripture. I told Anthony how U2 had been my lifelong favorite band. More importantly, I explained how that song and scripture were so meaningful to me. I gave him the quick version of the story of how I had experienced a profound spiritual encounter a little less than a year prior. I told him about the fact that some very dear friends of ours had lost their daughter to a random, unintended bullet, which struck her head as she drove home from an Independence Day fireworks show at Lake Meridian Park. I described how, in the midst of that terrible tragedy, God showed up for my friends who had lost their daughter. And I described how, on the morning she became an organ donor and gave life to six other people, I had that amazing encounter, thanks to what I know was the Holy Spirit speaking to me.

(If you would like to read in greater detail about what I experienced that day on July 8, 2023, I have written about it on my other blog: https://riches-of-his-grace.blogspot.com/2024/07/i-will-sing-new-song.html)

As Anthony and I talked there in the hall, we bonded over the fact that we were of like mind when it came to faith. We didn’t know yet whether we were of like mind when it came to this case, but I appreciated finally connecting with him, as throughout the trial we never really had much of a chance to talk to each other.

It was a little after 9 a.m., and we all started to worry whether our missing juror was going to make it. Just as the bailiff was about to call to check on their arrival, the juror walked in, and we could finally head to the deliberation room.

The bailiff led us to a larger room than the one we had used during the trial. She pointed out that all of the admitted evidence was there in boxes. There was a video monitor with a computer connected to it, so we could watch videos if we wanted. Even the firearm used to shoot Jesse was there in the room. The bailiff was kind enough to bring donuts for us to munch on.

She instructed us that if we had any questions for the court, were ready to go to lunch, or were done for the day, the foreperson could text her, and she would come knock on the door to get us. She also informed us that she wouldn’t be able to enter the room again once we got started. Our binders were randomly placed at spots around the tables. While we didn’t have to stay where they were placed, I think we all did.

With that, the bailiff left, giving us a final request to let her know who the foreperson was as soon as we decided. While any of us could have contacted her, she made it clear it would be easier if she communicated primarily with the foreperson.

The first order of business was to rearrange the tables so we could interact better. We spent far too much time adjusting furniture, worrying about getting the arrangement just right. A few of us were ready to get started and didn’t care much about perfecting the setup.

We finally got settled and went around the room, officially introducing ourselves with our real names for what felt like the first time. Some of us had talked and learned names, but many only knew each other’s numbers. As we went around the table, everyone was happy to share their real name—that is, until we got to juror #2. When it was his turn, he said, “I would prefer not to give out my name, and I would like you all to just address me as #2.” We all nodded, accepting his request. I’m sure most of us found it as unnecessary and odd as I did, but we were all fine with it.

After introductions, the first order of business was deciding who would be the foreperson. Someone asked, “Okay, is anyone interested in doing it?” The soft-spoken, tall Asian guy, juror #2, said he might be. Then juror #16 said he could be persuaded to take it on. I chimed in, mentioning that I’d been a foreperson on a past jury and had experience with the role. But I added that I wasn’t sure I wanted to do it this time because I had strong opinions on the case, and I felt the foreperson should stay more neutral. I believed they could have opinions but should express them sparingly. I wasn’t sure I could hold back in this case. Everyone seemed to agree with that, and my candidacy was set aside.

After about 10 minutes of discussion, we all agreed on juror #16. He thanked us for trusting him and texted the bailiff to let her know he would be the contact person moving forward. At that point, juror #8 spoke up, saying she wanted to remind us to treat each other with kindness and respect as we embarked on this process. Everyone wholeheartedly agreed with that sentiment.

Our new foreperson suggested starting with an anonymous straw poll on both counts. Everyone thought that was a good idea, so we each wrote our vote on a piece of paper. As the votes were turned in, I was thinking there might be one or two people who believed he was guilty on count one of second-degree murder. I entered deliberations certain we’d make quick work of count one, reaching a not guilty verdict without much debate. On count two, I was less confident. I believed he was guilty, but since I expected most to vote not guilty on count one, I figured they’d do the same for count two.

We all turned in our votes to our foreperson, and he began reading out the results. He started with count one, and I was surprised to hear multiple guilty verdicts as he read the votes. Then he moved on to count two, and there were even more guilty verdicts. As juror #1 stood at the whiteboard and tabulated the results, they came out as:

Count 1 – Murder in the second degree

Guilty – 6

Not Guilty – 6

 

Count 2 – Assault in the first degree

Guilty – 10

Not Guilty – 2

I was absolutely shocked. It was the opposite of what I had expected. I quickly realized that with a six-to-six split on count one, we could be at this for a long time.

With the vote tabulated, our foreperson suggested we go around the room and explain why we voted the way we did. He said it was up to each of us whether we wanted to speak or reveal what our actual votes were. I had no problem revealing mine, so I spoke first.

I let everyone know I had voted not guilty on count one and guilty on count two. The biggest factor for me on count one was that if the standard for a guilty verdict required no reasonable doubt, I couldn’t see how one could avoid having reasonable doubt. I didn’t believe there was any certainty that Officer Nelson didn’t believe his life was in danger when he took the first shot. You might suspect he didn’t really fear for his life, but given what the main witness said, there was no way to know that. I pointed out that Woodard was right there and got out of the car when he thought Jesse grabbed for Officer Nelson’s gun. I stressed that Woodard definitively said he saw Jesse grab for the gun and that it freaked him out. Woodard said in the moment, multiple times, that Jesse grabbed for the gun. I went on to say that I thought Officer Nelson screwed up royally in how he handled the arrest at the Sunshine Grocery, but those screw-ups didn’t constitute murder. There was no way in my mind I could ever find him guilty of second-degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

I then discussed my thoughts on the second count and described how I firmly believed he was guilty of that count. I reiterated what Mr. Calfo asserted the day before: Officer Nelson’s gun jammed, which afforded him a precious opportunity to assess whether to take that second shot. That was not just me opining about whether he could have held back on shooting him a second time; no, that was drilled into him in training after training. When your gun jams, you tap it, you re-rack it, and then you assess whether you still need to shoot. The evidence clearly showed that Nelson did not need to fire that second shot. He could have stepped back, created distance, and kept his gun trained on the suspect while he continued to assess whether any threat still existed. Instead of doing any of that, he impulsively shot Jesse in the head. He didn’t have just a split second to decide to shoot; HE HAD AN ETERNITY.

Everyone politely listened to my points of view as I finished my thoughts. Juror #3 spoke up next. He started by saying that he pretty much felt the same way I did, and that for count one, we just don’t know. However, as he continued talking, he began to talk himself out of that notion. I found it interesting because no one was pressing him on his positions, but in real time, he changed his mind from not guilty on count one to guilty. I thought, “Whoa, now the not guilty votes are in the minority.”

Juror #8 spoke up and said that she agreed with my sentiments. She mentioned that she had the same doubts I did about the charge and did not see how we could know he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, she firmly believed that he was guilty on count two. I was relieved to hear her point of view because I saw her as a calm, level-headed voice, which made me feel that I was not out in left field with my analysis.

Anthony (juror #6) was sitting right next to me, and he spoke next. Anthony immediately revealed that he felt Nelson was guilty on both counts. He pointed out that when Officer Nelson pushed Jesse against the freezer, he saw from the video that Jesse was falling away from Nelson and that there was no way Jesse could have even tried to stab him. Anthony asserted that when Nelson reached for his own gun, he knew he had possession of it. That inherently meant that Jesse getting the gun was not a threat at that time. Anthony’s point was that if one is able to throw another person against a freezer and that person has the gun firmly in their own hand, there is absolutely no reason to shoot. He felt this very strongly and poignantly said that he didn’t want to live in a world where someone who was clearly going through a crisis could be indiscriminately shot the way Jesse was.

Juror #5 jumped in and agreed with Anthony. She felt that Nelson could have and should have backed off and created distance instead of shooting. She brought up the point that Officer Nelson had backup on the way; he could have created that distance he was trained to do and waited for other officers to arrive on the scene. Finally, #5 asserted that Officer Nelson was the key aggressor in the entire incident. It was Nelson who initially reached down and grabbed Jesse when he really did not need to do that. She felt that Nelson created the dangerous situation and believed it was not okay for an officer to create danger and then use that danger to justify taking someone’s life.

Charlie (juror #1) spoke up and stated that she was certain Nelson was guilty on both counts. She felt, as I did, that throughout the entire encounter, Nelson completely erred in every choice he made. She pointed out that an officer with 10 years of experience and training could not have felt seriously threatened by a suspect who was much smaller and malnourished. She could not see how any reasonable officer would feel threatened by Jesse in that situation. She agreed with #5 that Officer Nelson put himself in that situation and that an officer can’t just declare they feared for their life and call it a day. Moreover, she did not believe he had any real fear that day. One thing that stood out to Charlie, which had never registered with me, was that Jesse was clutching a couple of dollar bills in his hand throughout the entire altercation. She argued that if that was the case, how could Jesse have truly been trying to grab a knife or a gun? That did not change anything for me, but I remember thinking she made some very astute points.

Next was juror #12, who also believed Nelson was guilty on both counts. She did not have much to add but felt that Nelson needed to wait for the backup he had called for. She believed he should have just stayed in the car and that if Jesse did something dangerous, then he could have approached. However, she felt like Jesse wasn’t doing anything.

With several strong opinions about Nelson’s guilt, I wondered if things would get to the point where it was everyone versus me. Then juror #11 spoke. She agreed with me that Officer Nelson was not guilty on count one. What resonated with her were the defense’s points about not always being able to fully discern what is happening on the video. She believed Jesse was ready for a fight that day, as evidenced by his scream during the altercation that he was not going to jail today. Juror #11 felt strongly that an officer has to be able to defend themselves and believed what Woodard said that night: that Jesse had superhuman strength in that moment. She felt that even though Nelson was bigger and trained, he would have legitimately feared for his life in that moment.

One of the last jurors to chime in was #13, and I was anxious to hear him speak because I had never heard a word come out of his mouth the entire trial. Juror #13 gave the most shocking statement of any of us. He quickly declared that he said not guilty on both counts, but he only did that because he wanted to be sure there was actual discussion about the verdict. He was worried that everyone would have declared Nelson guilty of both counts, and he felt it was important for there to be some discussion. He was prepared to play devil’s advocate and be a voice of dissension if he needed to be. A few jaws hit the floor. No one saw that kind of cunning coming from this super quiet juror. He went on to say that he absolutely felt like he was guilty on both counts and that he was glad there would be others to challenge that notion.

When it all came down to it, after working around the room, the votes stood as follows:

Juror #1           –          Guilty, Guilty

Juror #2           –          Not Guilty, Not Guilty

Juror #3           –          Guilty, Guilty

Juror #5           –          Guilty, Guilty

Juror #6           –          Guilty, Guilty

Juror #7           –          Guilty, Guilty

Juror #8           –          Not Guilty, Guilty

Juror #9 (me) –          Not Guilty, Guilty      

Juror # 11        –          Not Guilty, Guilty

Juror # 12        –          Guilty, Guilty

Juror # 13        –          Guilty, Guilty

Juror # 16        –          Guilty, Guilty

Within about five minutes of that re-tallying, the lone juror who had felt Nelson was not guilty on count two had been persuaded and now felt certain of a guilty charge on that count. With that, we put count two aside, and for the rest of the first day, we poured through evidence together. We watched video after video. We looked at photos of Jesse lying lifeless on the ground, still clutching those dollar bills. We talked about the knife and how that played into things.

Throughout the day, for all the reasons I have laid out to this point, I remained certain that Nelson was not guilty on the first count. I listened to everyone speak about different reasons they were sure he was guilty, but I was unmoved.

By the end of the day, juror #8 was moved, and she declared that she was now a guilty vote. As it got to be 4 PM, we decided to call it a day and break for a long weekend since there would not be court on the following Monday.

Our foreperson texted the bailiff to come get us, and moments later she arrived to let us out for the day. As we gathered by the door, the bailiff warned us fairly innocuously that another case had a sentencing that afternoon and that we might encounter a bit of activity as we exited. None of us thought too much of it, but when we opened the door to the rotunda, it was absolute chaos. There were maybe a hundred people milling around, screaming profanities at one another, pushing and shoving. I saw at least two or three scuffles where people were throwing punches. There were maybe a dozen court security officers trying to control the situation to no avail.

The twelve of us tried to quickly move through the melee without having an errant punch land on us. We ducked our heads and made our way to the staircase to get out of the situation in rapid fashion. As we finally made it to the first floor and exited the building, many of us were clearly shaken by the event.

I ultimately learned that just before we decided to end our deliberations for the day, another courtroom had a sentencing for a notorious triple murder suspect named Joshua Puloka, aka Joshua Everybodytalksabout. He had been involved in a fight at a bar in 2021 where he ended up shooting five individuals, some of whom had nothing to do with the initial altercation. It seems that supporters of both Joshua Everybodytalksabout and supporters of the victims were present for the sentencing, and upon him receiving a life sentence for the murders, the crowd of warring factions spilled into the rotunda, and a brawl ensued.

As I learned about those details later that evening, I was angry that we were allowed to exit the building through all that commotion. I could not believe that no one thought of our safety and considered taking us down through the back elevator to keep us away from the disturbance.

As I thought more about those events, it occurred to me that the case we were deliberating was likely also very contentious. I feared that whatever verdict we might come to could enrage one group or another.

I had a very difficult time sleeping that Friday evening as I toiled over what we would have to decide in the coming days.