Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Let the Jury Choose Itself

Heading into a trial thinking that you are going to pick just the right jury who will all vote your way is akin to thinking that you can just pick all the right lottery numbers because of the characteristics of the numbers themselves - four is more likely to be a winning number than three because four is more angular and three has too many curves - five is a confusing combination of both.

You cannot pick a jury. I know that is a bold statement and will be met with howls of resistance by those who think you can actually, scientifically, determine who is just the right juror. I'm sorry, but my experience teaches me that this cannot be done.

You cannot predict how an individual will act in a group setting, under pressure with the data that is available to you at the time you have to pick your jury. Further, you cannot predict how that group of individuals will act once it is time for them to deliberate. The interaction of 12 individuals, previously unknown to each other, with separate and distinct personalities and backgrounds cannot be reduced to some quantifiable scientific equation. There are just too many variables.

You can't know who is really going to emerge as a strong voice. Will it be the big, middle-aged construction worker or the sixty year old retired school teacher? Will the well educated college professor carry the day or will it be the thirty year old computer programmer? Do you want engineers or not on your jury? What about people who have had a recent death in the family? People who have known grief and loss? People who've been injured? People who are recovering addicts? People who have unresolved issues with their parents or siblings?

As you start to ask the questions, the absurdity of trying to figure out all the answers becomes clear.

So, what can you do?

You can pose a problem similar to the problems that the jury will have to wrestle with in your case and then watch and let them work through it. This requires some forethought. You have to understand the problems in your case. You have to be able to reduce them to a common concern, fear or issue that the members of the jury are likely to have experienced. Then, you have to get them to open up and work with you.

The last part is potentially the hardest.

Put yourself in their shoes. How would you feel if you were called to jury duty and had never spent any time in a court room setting? How would you feel once you check in, get a badge, and are shuffled off into a big room with a bunch of strangers? Wouldn't you really rather be at work, or at home, or anywhere else? Aren't you hoping they don't choose you?

Some clerk is telling you where to go and what to do. There are bailiff's around with guns. You are in an unfamiliar setting waiting. You wait for an hour or more and nothing happens.

Someone comes and they take you and a bunch of others to a courtroom. They call you a panel or a venire. They sit you and some others in the jury box. The rest of the group is put in the pews nearby. The Judge is there, in black robes, looking very serious and imposing. She doesn't look happy to be there and she doesn't look happy that you are there. Is there something wrong? Is this a bad case? Did you do something bad?

She starts talking to you and  some of what she says makes sense. Some of what she says is in a foreign language only understood by lawyers. But, you learn a little about what's expected of you, who else is in the courtroom and what may happen. And she asks you a bunch of questions. Then, she turns you over to the lawyers.

A lawyer pops up and starts talking to you. You don't know what the case is about, but he's asking you questions about stuff that seems like it might have to do with the case. It's all out of context and jumbled up, so it doesn't make much sense to you. He wants you to agree with him. Everyone else is nodding. So, you do, too. Sure, I can be fair, you say.

He smiles at you, you did something right. He asks someone nearby about some personal stuff. They answer. The lawyer frowns. He asks more questions, penetrating questions. You feel uncomfortable and squirm in your chair as the juror on the other end gets a little red in the face. What did he do wrong? Why is the lawyer unhappy with him? Why is he cross examining him?

Imagine how you would feel in that situation. When you are under pressure in a room full of strangers, its hard to feel comfortable and let your defenses down.

How things can be different

The lawyer stands up and starts to talk with you, not at you. He asks some easy questions and then he waits for an answer. He's not arguing with anyone. He's not trying to convince anyone of anything. He seems genuinely concerned about the trial and his client. He seems like he is not trying to figure out a reason to get rid of you, but he want's to include you, and everyone else there.

You begin to understand he has some concerns about the trial. He let's you know how they make him feel, and why. He communicates his true feelings, and you can tell that he's being genuine. You can always tell when someone is being genuine. He's not trying to fake anyone out.

When someone on the jury panel speaks, he listens carefully. He focuses on that person. He pays attention and makes sure he understands what they are saying. He opens the door for further comments and doesn't seem scared that jurors are talking with him and to each other. In fact, it seems to make him happy that jurors are voicing their opinions and thoughts.

As the jury warms to him and you all talk to him about things that might be argued at trial, things that you might have to discuss together in the jury room, you start listening to your fellow jurors and they start listening to you. You begin to warm toward each other and accept each other.

You begin to form a group. You begin to come together. As you learn about each other, there may even be things you don't like, but people are being honest and talking about themselves. And the lawyer is right in the middle of it, encouraging it, letting it happen, facilitating it.

And he never tries to argue or cross examine someone. If there is a level of discomfort, it comes from the subject, not the way he talks to someone. He becomes part of the group and people are listening to him and reacting to what he says and asks.

Maybe it comes out that someone in the group has trouble working through a particular issue. They just can't seem to be open about it. You can see he understands, and you understand when that juror is not chosen later. I makes sense because they would have trouble handling that issue during the trial.

He talks about what is going to happen in the trial, and what you and the other jurors are going to do. He asks how you feel about doing those things. You begin to lose your fear of the process and warm to your task.

You begin to feel empowered as you realize you matter. He says you are the most important part of the trial and by the way he's treating and interacting with you, you start to feel that you might be.

You gain confidence. You feel ready to go forward and be a juror.

And the lawyer wants you to be on the jury. You can feel it. It is a warm, accepting feeling. You are ready to work, and you feel comfortable with him. You can be fair. You can be open minded. You can look at this person's case exactly the way you would want someone to do it if you were on trial.

The jury is ready. They have chosen themselves as jurors. Or, in rare cases, they have shown they cannot be a juror on that particular case. They have given themselves permission to be brave, strong, open and fair. They have shown themselves to be willing to work together and to carefully work through the issues of the case. The lawyer has watched them work together and knows that they will do a good job.

They will carefully consider his case. They trust him and he trusts them. They will be fair.

What more can you ask of a jury?

Bob Vogel
rlvogel@robertvogellaw.com
865-357-1949
The Vogel Law Firm
www.robertvogellaw.com

Bob Vogel is an experienced trial attorney who represents defendants in criminal cases and individuals in injury, civil rights and consumer protection cases in both Federal and State Courts.

Thursday, January 9, 2014

U.S. Boiler Recalls Home Heating Boilers Due to Carbon Monoxide Hazard

Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

Hazard:

The air pressure switch can fail to shut down the burners when there is a blockage in the vent system, allowing the boiler to emit excessive amounts of carbon monoxide and posing a CO poisoning hazard to the consumer

The following report was issued on 1/9/14. If you have been injured by this product, or any other product, contact The Vogel Law Firm immediately for assistance. 865-357-1949, or email: Karen@robertvogellaw - You will receive a free consultation and case evaluation.


Recall date: January 09, 2014
Recall number: 14-076                    
      

Recall Summary

Name of product:
Gas-fired hot water boilers
                           

Units
About 26,000 in the United States and about 310 in Canada
Description
This recall involves U.S. Boiler ESC, PVG and SCG model cast iron hot water boilers that use natural gas or liquid petroleum to heat water for residential space heating. The boilers are light blue in color with black trim, about 40 inches tall, about 26 inches deep and range from 12 to 31 inches wide. The model name and U.S. Boiler logo are on the front cover of the boiler. The front cover of the boiler is vented. Recalled boilers were manufactured between December 2005 and February 2013. The model number, serial number and manufacturing date are located on a silver label on the top panel of ESC models and on the inside of PVG and SCG models on the right side panel. The manufacturing date appears in the upper right corner of the silver label in the MM/YYYY format.  The following model numbers and serial number ranges are included in this recall:

Model NumberSerial Number Range
ESC3 through ESC965249110 through 65382278
PVG3_P, PVG4_P and PVG5 through PVG964870666 through 65385748; 97939433
SCG3 through SCG935200197; 65283322 through 65858729
Incidents/Injuries
None reported
Remedy
Consumers with recalled boilers should immediately contact the installer or distributor from whom they purchased the boiler or U.S. Boiler to schedule a free in-home safety inspection and repair. Consumers who continue use of the boilers while awaiting repair, should have a working carbon monoxide alarm installed outside of sleeping areas in the home.
Sold at
Plumbing and heating wholesale distributors nationwide from December 2005 through February 2013 for between $1,700 and $4,900.
Manufacturer
U.S. Boiler Company Inc., of Lancaster, Penn.
Manufactured in
United States

Wednesday, January 8, 2014

Criminal Defense, Personal injury And Consumer Protection - The Vogel Law Firm - Knoxville, Tn : Other

Criminal Defense, Personal injury And Consumer Protection - The Vogel Law Firm - Knoxville, Tn : Other

Choosing a Criminal Defense Attorney - 12 Things to Look For (And 12 things to Avoid)

I'm going to start this article and finish it with the same standard for choosing an attorney - I give you more information below, but here's what you must demand in your lawyer:

You want an attorney who can and will effectively tell your story to the jury. That's a great attorney.

So, you've been charged with a crime. Or your son, brother, boyfriend, husband, wife, cousin... has. Do you go with the public defender or a court appointed lawyer? If you can't afford to hire one on your own, the Court has to appoint you an attorney. First, they will qualify you as indigent. Then, they will likely assign you to the Public Defender (PD) or, if there is a conflict - like they represent your co-defendant - then you will get a court appointed attorney (an attorney in private practice who accepts appointments of indigent defendants from the Court).

Before I move on with choosing an attorney, let me say that the general perception that the PD or that court appointed attorney are not as good as attorneys you might hire is complete bunk. I mean it. In fact, PDs and court appointed attorneys may be better and more experienced. Just because they don't have fancy offices or charge you $25,000 to look at your case doesn't mean you won't get top representation. The only problem PDs and appointed attorneys have is that they generally have a heavier case load, so, you might not get as much attention and hand holding as you would like. However, they often have a much better relationship with the prosecutor and may be able to get advocate more effectively for you than that high priced attorney in the tower downtown.

But, here's the most important thing to know about PD's and appointed attorneys - they are all in - they do this gig because they love helping people - they believe in helping people. They're not in it for the money, and that says a lot. Nobody gets rich defending indigent clients. But, many people do it every day. They are noble and deserve a great deal of respect and a vote of thanks and confidence they don't normally get. If you have one of these attorneys, be proud. You are represented by a truly noble individual who has your best interest at heart. There is a lot to be said for that.

That being said, if I were going out to look for an attorney to hire, here's what I would look for and what I would avoid:

Attributes to look for:
  1. Honest and straight forward;
  2. Talk to you and treat you as a person;
  3. Look you in the eye when they talk to you;
  4. Listen to you and ask you a lot of questions about your case;
  5. They write down your answers;
  6. They tell you the strengths and weaknesses of your case;
  7. They give you an honest assessment of your case;
  8. They have a respectful rapport with the prosecutor;
  9. They have a respectful rapport with the judge;
  10. They look at your case well enough to know if any of your fundamental rights have been violated by the police and are willing to fight for them if you want them to;
  11. They are happy to be where they are;
  12. The more experience, the better - but don't discount the zealous newbie! Sometimes he's got something to prove! BUT - they should have trial experience and/or should have gone through top-notch trial training - The Trial Lawyer's College or, in Tennessee - the training offered through Tennessee Association of Defense Lawyers are two places that provide top notch training for criminal defense attorneys. I've been to both and can tell you from experience that they offer great programs. Your lawyer needs to at least have done something like that - because they don't teach you to try cases in law school - hopefully, your lawyer, if he's young, has a mentor he can go to for advice.
 Avoid:

 
  1. Anyone who promises you a result;
  2. Anyone who wants a fee to review your case and tell you if they will take it - this is a con - run, fast, don't look back no matter how good a game they talk (I've heard of people laying out $25,000 to find out that the attorney didn't want their case - not to do any work, just evaluate it - now that's a racket);
  3. Anyone who says they have a prosecutor or a judge in their pocket;
  4. Anyone who says they know the cop and can fix it;
  5. Anyone who spends more time campaigning then he does working;
  6. Anyone who runs crazy TV ads or has his face on billboards and buses;
  7. Anyone who says that they can get you "off" if you give them a whole bunch of money;
  8. Anyone who won't take the time to listen to you;
  9. Anyone who doesn't look you in the eye when you speak;
  10. Anyone who's attention is elsewhere when you meet;
  11. Anyone who doesn't ask you a lot of questions about your case and listen carefully to the answers;
  12. Anyone who won't give you a solid, sensible answer about the strengths and weaknesses of your case.
When I take a case, I take it with the attitude that I am going to prepare it for trial. I work toward trial until somebody tells me to stop. Often, that is my client, because he wants to accept a deal that the prosecutor offered him. Here's the advice I give my client's when they are consider whether or not they should take a deal:

If, after a careful assessment of your case, you can do better by taking a deal from the prosecutor than if you go to trial and lose, then you should take the deal. This assessment factors in the strength of the State's case against you and the strength of your defenses. There is no way to predict what the jury will do - often they do the unexpected - but I've tried enough cases that I can often give my client's a reasonable assessment of their chances at trial. If, after all that, you are better off taking the deal, then I'd tell you to take it. The only caveat would be, of course, if you are innocent - then, you must take it to trial. I say that because I have seen people take deals even when they were innocent, against my advice, because they so desperately wanted to get out of jail and could not afford the price of the bond. (That's for another discussion).

In the end, you have to have confidence in your attorney. You have to believe that he is going to fight for you and do his best on your behalf. Just remember, fighting doesn't mean yelling and getting all pompous in front of the judge, it has nothing to do with righteous indignation and vitriolic satire - fighting means finding the strengths of your case and the weaknesses of the State's and clearly stating both. Fighting means taking up your cause, litigating the issues that are worth litigating - attacking the State's case where it is vulnerable. And, as I said above, you want this:

You want an attorney who can and will effectively tell your story to the jury. That's a great attorney.

Thanks for your interest. I'd love to hear your comments.

Bob Vogel