Jury Duty - Day 2 - PM

When we returned from lunch at 1:45, we listened to the 911 call and then were asked to view all of the police cruiser video pertaining to the case. In the 911 call, we could clearly hear a female voice screaming (not words) in the background as Mrs. R. talked to the operator. Mrs. R told the 911 operator that her "daughter's ex is after her with a knife. Hurry! He just hit her in the face with a shovel. Send the police and an ambulance."

We then watched the 50 minute video taken by the police cruiser's camera as the officers apprehended the suspect and interviewed all the people involved. It was very tedious. The video only showed the view out the front windshield of the car - we watched dusk descend as we tried to hear what was being said. The put the suspect in the police car without problems, but when they got to the scene of the incident, they got him out to pat him down better and had to use the stun gun on him to get him back into the car. As the officers talked to the two ladies (?) involved, the police radio kept blaring loudly over the audio. There was also a commercial radio program confusing the audio.

We found out that the police did not interview the women until after they apprehended the defendant (about an hour later.) They came into the yard and ascertained that he was no longer on the premises so that the paramedics could enter and render aid, then they left to search for the perpetrator and weapon. The paramedics testified that Ms L's nose was swollen, bleeding profusely and probably broken and that her clothing was covered with blood when they entered the home. She accepted treatment on the scene but refused to be transported to the hospital. By the time the police arrived to interview her, she had changed clothes and had no visible blood according to the police record.

The prosecution rested about 3:30, and the defense began its case. Their only witness was the victim. She testified again - recanting everything that she had said on the police tape and denying everything that had been reported by the paramedics and her "mother." According to her testimony, she was equally to blame for the altercation and her relationship with the defendant was normal. When the prosecution cross-examined her, she became belligerent. She took every opportunity to tell how much she distrusts and dislikes the PO-lice. At one point she dumb-founded everybody with this exchange: Prosecutor asked, "Was the defendent upset or out of control?" She answered, "No he was very calm." The prosecutor followed up with, "But you said he was being a "B-hole." She responded, "Well you can be calm and also be a B-hole. You are acting calm!" Gasps and snickers were heard throughout the courtroom, and the judge looked down and "coughed" into his hand. The prosecutor continued as if she hadn't just called him an insulting name.

According to the witness, the defendent only came to discuss an overdue bill (other sources, including her own comments on the night of the incident said that the argument was about the impending new living arrangements.) According to her testimony now, when the defendant tried to go into the house he was only going to get a washcloth to wipe away the blood she got on herself when the shovel accidently hit her in the face. All the other evidence showed that he hit her with the shovel and then tried to get into the house to get the baby and take him back to their house.

The defense rested its case at about 4:00. The judge said that we would adjourn for the day and have closing arguments tomorrow beginning at 9 AM.