3.Panel 5 Voir Dire — General Inquiry, Hardship, and Cause Excusals
459 linesCOURT STAFF: No, sir.
THE COURT: Deputy Borda has confirmed that there were no persons sitting outside of 12 alpha.
I will advise Madam Clerk to let jury services know that juror in Seat 11, wearing Badge 695, need not report.
Do you want to strike them for cause or what do you want to do with those persons?
MR. HENDERSON: Stipulate.
THE COURT: All right. Those jurors in those seats and badges will be stricken for cause via stipulation.
Anything else, State, we need to address before we bring in our panel?
THE COURT: Defense?
MR. HENDERSON: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Let's stand up and bring in our panel. Thank you.
(Venire Panel 5 entered.)
THE COURT: If you could swear in our panel.
COURT CLERK: Will everyone please raise your right hands to be sworn, please.
(Venire Panel 5 sworn at 2:09 p.m.)
THE COURT: Thank you-all. You may be seated.
Good afternoon, members of our panel. Welcome now to Courtroom 23 alpha of the Orange County Courthouse in the Circuit Court Criminal Division.
As you may recall, my name is Judge Michael Kraynick, and I will be the presiding judge in the case of the State of Florida vs. Sarah Boone.
I'm going to ask the State to please reintroduce themselves to you for this afternoon's proceedings.
MR. CACCIATORE: Good afternoon. Dave Cacciatore, assistant state attorney.
THE COURT: And, defense, if you could please introduce yourself and your client again to our panel.
MR. OWENS: Good afternoon. My name is James Owens. This is my client, Sarah Boone.
MR. HENDERSON: Good afternoon. Tony Henderson, co-counsel for Sarah Boone.
MS. ANDREWS: Good afternoon. Shelbie Andrews, jury selection and trial consultant.
MS. HENDERSON: Good afternoon. Attorney Lauren Henderson, assisting the defense team.
THE COURT: Thank you-all. You can be seated.
Before we get started, members of our panel, I wanted to confirm if you've complied with the Court's instructions that were given to you, either on October the 14th or October the 15th, not to conduct any independent research or investigation, not to watch the local news or read local newspapers, or not to discuss this case with anyone, either in person or through a computer. If you've complied with the Court's instructions, please raise your paddles at this time. The record will reflect that all paddles have been raised.
Members of the jury, I still have a couple of questions to go over with each and every one of you this afternoon, before I turn over questioning to the State.
Now, as we've discussed previously, either with -- when you were with us on Monday or Tuesday, that this is a criminal case, and I want to go over a couple of important criminal concepts that you might be familiar with.
Now, maybe you're familiar with this by virtue of schooling or watching TV or reading the newspaper or books, or just your own life experiences, but it's not every day that we get to see these criminal concepts played out in real life, so I want to take the opportunity to go over some of those with you now.
The first is the presumption of innocence. In the United States of America, when you are charged with a crime, you are presumed innocent. It doesn't matter if it's an allegation of speeding or an allegation of murder, Ms. Boone comes to this courtroom presumed innocent.
If I was to ask one of you to render a verdict right now, what would your verdict be? So continuing from Monday or Tuesday, the interactive portion of our program, I'm going to be asking questions again.
So does anybody want to take a jump at that? If I was to ask you to render a verdict right now, what would it be?
Juror No. 34, yes, sir?
JUROR: Innocent.
THE COURT: Perfect. Not guilty.
Does anybody disagree with that? Raise your paddles. Okay. No paddles.
Does everyone agree with that? Raise your paddle if you agree with Juror 34.
Juror No. 6, I don't see your paddle raised, sir. Oh, there we go. All right. Raise it up high for me. All right. Record will reflect that all have been raised. Thank you.
Juror 34 is completely right. That's right. Your verdict right now would have to be not guilty or innocent because you have not seen or heard or observed anything to overcome that presumption of innocence.
Does anyone have an issue with the fact that Ms. Boone right now as she sits is absolutely not guilty? If you have a concern with that concept, please raise your paddle at this time. Court sees no paddles.
Does anyone think that just because of where Ms. Boone is seated at the defense counsel's table, she must have done something wrong? If you have that opinion, please raise your paddle at this time. Court sees no paddles.
One of the other criminal concepts to address is if you're selected to be a juror in this case, it will be your job to determine the facts, apply the law that I give you, and render a lawful verdict. This is the phrase of sitting in judgment.
Now, I want you to understand that you're not going to be passing any moral judgments on the defendant. You're also not going to be imposing a fair and impartial sentence. That will be a court's job if, and only if, the State meets their burden beyond a reasonable doubt. That way the role of the jury and the role of the judge are separate and they never overlap.
With that being said, does anyone have any religious or moral concerns to act as a juror and sit in judgment in this case?
Juror No. 20, yes, ma'am?
JUROR: Yes. I have a religious concern. I feel like Jesus is the number one person that can do that, sit in judgment. So I'm not sure that I would be fit to sit in judgment of someone.
THE COURT: Okay. But do you understand that you're not going to actually be rendering any judgments?
JUROR: Kind of.
THE COURT: Okay. Well, let me explain it to you this way. So if you're asked to serve as our juror in this case, right?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: You're going to listen to the evidence that the State presents.
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: You're going to listen to the evidence that the defense presents, if they put on a case.
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: And then I'm going to explain the law to you, and then you'll have to apply that law to the facts to say, yes or no, did the State meet their burden of proof. Do you understand all that?
JUROR: I understand.
THE COURT: Can you do that?
JUROR: I don't think so.
THE COURT: Okay. I appreciate your honesty. Thank you, ma'am. The lawyers may have some follow up with you on that.
Anyone else, moral or religious concerns about sitting in judgment? Raise your paddles. Court sees no paddles.
The next concept is reasonable doubt. And I've used that a couple of times, both Monday and Tuesday, when I first had the opportunity to speak with you. You need to understand that the State of Florida is the one who has brought the charge against Ms. Boone in this case. And you need to understand that they are the ones that have the burden of proof in this case.
The defense has a constitutional right to sit there and do absolutely nothing, other than argue that the State has failed to meet that burden of proof, because the defense has no burden. The burden is entirely upon the State of Florida during the course of this trial.
Does anyone have an issue with the constitutional principle that the burden of proof stays with the State of Florida at all times to prove all allegations against Ms. Boone? If you have an issue with this concept, please raise your paddle at this time. Court sees no paddles.
Does anyone here think that Ms. Boone has to prove anything to you? If you have that opinion, please raise your paddle at this time. Court sees no paddles.
Now, as I said, the State of Florida's burden is beyond a reasonable doubt. I'm now going to read to you the legal definition of reasonable doubt as created by the Florida Supreme Court.
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all doubt.
A reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt, a speculative, imaginary, or forced doubt. Such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt. On the other hand, if, after carefully considering, comparing, and weighing all the evidence, there is not an abiding conviction of guilt, or if having a conviction, it is one which is not stable, but one which wavers and vacillates, then the charge is not proved beyond every reasonable doubt and you must find the defendant not guilty because the doubt is reasonable.
Don't worry, there's not a pop quiz. Not going to ask any of you to read that back to me. That's the legal definition of reasonable doubt.
Now, if you're selected to be a member of our jury, you'll be given a copy of that instruction. When I read you the law, you will be able to bring that in with you to the deliberation room while you make your decisions in this case.
Raise your paddles if you agree to apply the definition that I just gave to you. I believe I see all paddles.
Let me ask it this way: Is anyone not going to apply the definition that I gave to you? Raise your paddles. Court sees no paddles. Thank you.
Is there anyone here who thinks that burden is just too high for the State? Beyond a reasonable doubt, too much? Anybody have that thought? Raise your paddles now. Okay. Court sees no paddles.
Alternatively, does anyone think that burden is just too low? Beyond a reasonable doubt, too low for the State, needs to be more? If you have that opinion, raise your paddle at this time. Okay. Court sees no paddles.
Now, nothing in the instructions that I give to you are going to tell you how many witnesses the State needs to call or how many pieces of evidence they need to provide to us to prove their case in order to convict Ms. Boone.
If the State calls one witness, no exhibits, no paper, one witness. That witness convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Boone is guilty, what should your verdict be? Anybody want to take a jump at that question?
I think Juror No. 8 was slightly before you, No. 17.
Juror No. 8, yes, sir?
JUROR: Guilty.
THE COURT: Speak up for me.
JUROR: Guilty.
THE COURT: Okay. Does anybody disagree with that?
Okay. Juror No. 2, you disagree?
JUROR: Has the defense had a chance to rebut that?
THE COURT: Yes, sir, everything's been presented. One witness. The defense chooses not to put on a case, you hear from one witness and that witness convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt, what should your verdict be?
JUROR: No disagreement.
THE COURT: Speak up for me, sir.
JUROR: No disagreement.
THE COURT: So you agree it should be a guilty verdict?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Thank you.
Does anyone disagree with that? Raise your paddles if you do. Okay. I see no paddles.
Juror No. 2, let's change this a little bit. Let's say the State calls 30 witnesses and puts in 3,000 pieces of information. You're on our jury and you go back to the deliberation room, and you take notes and you remember everything that everybody said. And you look intently at every single piece of those 3,000 pieces, you're not convinced, you have doubts, what's your verdict?
JUROR: Not guilty.
THE COURT: Does anybody disagree with that? Raise your paddles if you disagree with that. Court sees no paddles.
The reason Juror 2 and Juror 8 and I had that conversation, it's not about the quantity of the evidence and testimony that the State provides, it's the quality of the evidence and testimony the State provides. Raise your paddles if you understand that. All right. Record will reflect all paddles have been raised.
Raise your paddles if you agree to apply that. Record will reflect all paddles have been raised. All right. Thank you very much.
The next is the right to remain silent. In every criminal proceeding, a defendant has the absolute right to remain silent. I will instruct you to follow the law as set out in the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Florida, and it says that you cannot hold it against the defendant if she chooses not to testify.
Is there anyone that has an issue with this concept? Raise your paddle if you do. Court sees no paddles.
Is there anyone here who expects to hear from Ms. Boone during trial? If you have that expectation, please raise your paddle. Court sees no paddles.
Oh, 39, I'm sorry. I didn't see you. Yes, ma'am, why is it that you expect to hear from Ms. Boone?
JUROR: I thought that --
THE COURT: You're going to have to speak up for me. Do we have the microphone? Perfect. All right. Ma'am, the deputy is going to bring you the microphone, if you can speak into it for us, that would be fabulous.
JUROR: Now, I'm not too familiar, but I thought that if the individual is claiming to be innocent, that he or she would speak on his or her behalf to help prove their innocence.
THE COURT: Okay. But did you hear me explain earlier that the State of Florida is the one that has the burden in this case?
JUROR: The State of Florida has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt --
THE COURT: Correct.
JUROR: -- that the defendant is guilty.
THE COURT: Correct. And that Ms. Boone comes into this court, whether it be here in 23A or 12 alpha, or any other floor in this courthouse with the presumption of innocence. She's done nothing wrong. Do you understand that?
JUROR: I hear you.
THE COURT: Okay. So why is it that if she chooses not to testify and exercise that constitutional right are you going to hold it against her if she does not testify?
JUROR: I wouldn't say hold it against her.
THE COURT: You would?
JUROR: I wouldn't -- holding -- I wouldn't say that I would hold it against her. I just -- I just thought that she would have something to say.
THE COURT: Okay. What if she chooses not to say anything?
JUROR: It's her choice.
THE COURT: Okay. And if we get to the defense case and they say, Judge, we're not going to put ona case, and you don't hear anything from the defense, is that going to be an issue? Are you going to have concerns because you haven't heard from her?
JUROR: At that point, it's just basically a matter of going with what has been presented. If there is nothing presented from her, then --
THE COURT: So, if she chose not to testify, would you or would you not hold it against her?
JUROR: I wouldn't hold it against her because at the end of the day, it's a personal choice.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you. The lawyers may have some follow up with you.
Anyone else concerns if -- or rather, if you expect to hear from Ms. Boone, anyone else expect to hear from her? If you do, go ahead and raise your paddles. All right. Court sees no paddles. Thank you.
A final way to think about these criminal concepts that we just went over, presumption of innocence, reasonable doubt, right to remain silent, is that I'm the judge. Because I'm the judge, I can do whatever I want. I can't. It's not how it works. It doesn't matter what I think, it doesn't matter what I feel. What matters is on the wall right up there in stone, Equal Justice Under the Law. Every courtroom has to apply it the same way, whether I like it or not.
And I'm going to ask you to do the same things. And what myself and the State and the defense are interested in knowing is whether or not the beliefs and feelings that you may have, if you can set those aside and follow the law that I'm going to give to you in this case.
Does anyone have any concerns with regard to the criminal concepts that we just went over? If you do, please raise your paddles at this time. Court sees no paddles.
Now, I've had the opportunity to go over some of your questionnaires over the last couple days to get to know some of you. We have all different persons from different walks of life. We have stay-at-home mothers, we have security personnel, engineers, CFOs, recreation coordinators, sales reps, and managers of hotels. All different walks.
Now, when I give you instructions on the credibility of witnesses, there's not going to be a different set of rules for hotel managers, sales reps, stay-at-home moms, engineers, or CFOs. They're all looked at equally. The same goes for law enforcement.
Is anyone here going to believe a law enforcement officer just a little bit more because they're a law enforcement officer? If you have that belief, please raise your paddle at this time. All right. Court sees no paddles.
The flip side of that coin. Are you going to believe a law enforcement officer just a little bit less because they're a law enforcement officer? If you have that opinion, please raise your paddles at this time. All right. Court sees no paddles.
My last topic involves any personal experiences in the criminal justice system. Have any one of you or your immediate family members ever been arrested? If so, please raise your paddles at this time.
I'm going to start over here on my left. I have 1 and 6. You can go ahead and put those down. Thank you.
Second row, keep them up. 15 and 19. Thank you. And 29. All right. Thank you very much.
Over here on my right. 8, thank you, sir. You can put that down. 22, 26, 27, 38, 39, 40, 48, 49, and 53.
All right. I'm going to start over here on my left. Juror No. 134 in Seat No. 1, afternoon. Who was it?
JUROR: Who was it?
THE COURT: Yes, sir. Who was it in relation to you?
JUROR: Better question would be, who wasn't it? I have a lot of family members who --
THE COURT: Okay.
JUROR: I have brothers and uncles, I think my father has been in jail a couple times, so --
THE COURT: Okay. Did those take place here in Orange County?
JUROR: Yes. Some of them.
THE COURT: Some of them did. Okay. Do you recall who specifically that may have happened to here in Orange County?
JUROR: I believe my brother, my older brother.
THE COURT: Okay. What about your father?
JUROR: I believe he did have some instances in Orange County as well.
THE COURT: Okay. And do you know if they were taken to court?
JUROR: I was really young when a lot of this happened, so I would like to say it did, but --
THE COURT: How long ago was both your brother and your father, ballpark it for me?
JUROR: I was in middle school, I'm 24 right now, so I would say maybe around 2013, 2012-ish.
THE COURT: Okay. So 10, 12 years ago?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: But can you say for certain whether or not they went to court?
JUROR: Yeah, I can say for certain.
THE COURT: Okay. Do you have any personal knowledge as to whether they were represented by an attorney?
JUROR: Probably a public attorney.
THE COURT: Okay. And do you have any personal knowledge as to whether or not they were treated fairly?
JUROR: I believe so.
THE COURT: Okay. Your father and you had other extended family as well that may have gone through it. Was that here in Florida or other states?
JUROR: Here in Florida.
THE COURT: Okay. Do you know in those instances if those family members went to court?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Do you have any personal knowledge if they were represented by attorneys?
JUROR: I would assume so.
THE COURT: Do you have any personal knowledge as to whether or not they were treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: I would assume they were treated fairly.
THE COURT: All right. You brother's and father's experiences in the criminal justice system here in Orange County, along with your extended family's experiences in the criminal justice system in the State of Florida, generally, are those going to have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: No, it would not.
THE COURT: Thank you, sir.
Juror No. 6, afternoon, sir.
JUROR: Hi.
THE COURT: What happened, who, and when?
JUROR: It was me, and it's been 40 years ago.
THE COURT: Where was that, sir?
JUROR: New Jersey.
THE COURT: Did you go to court?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Were you represented by an attorney?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Do you believe you were treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: By the Court, yes.
THE COURT: Your own experience in the criminal justice system in the State of New Jersey, will that have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: It shouldn't.
THE COURT: Shouldn't?
JUROR: Should not.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
Juror in Seat 15, yes, sir?
JUROR: A couple of my brothers up in New Jersey.
THE COURT: Also up in New Jersey?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: When did that take place? When in time?
JUROR: Oh, man. It was like 30 years ago.
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge, sir, if they went to court?
JUROR: I'm pretty sure they probably did.
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge if they were represented by attorneys?
JUROR: Excuse me?
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge as to whether or not they were represented by attorneys?
JUROR: I think it was a public defender.
THE COURT: Okay. Do you have any knowledge as to whether or not they were treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: I couldn't tell you. I was in the service and I know they got locked up.
THE COURT: Thank you for your service, sir.
Your brother's experience 30-some-odd years ago in the State of New Jersey, in that criminal justice system, will that impact your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, sir.
Juror No. 19?
JUROR: My brother was arrested for a DUI.
THE COURT: When was that, sir?
JUROR: Twenty-five years ago.
THE COURT: Where was that?
JUROR: Bloomington, Indiana.
THE COURT: Okay. And do you have any knowledge as to whether or not he went to court?
JUROR: He did. He had an attorney. I was living out of state. I called him and he said they got me, and he served three days in jail. He admitted he screwed up. He didn't blame the court system. He thought he got a good shake.
THE COURT: Okay. So fair and impartial?
JUROR: Oh, yeah.
THE COURT: He was treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Is that going to have any impact on your ability to be fair and impartial in this case?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Thank you, sir.
Juror No. 29?
JUROR: Hello.
THE COURT: Hello. I may need her to get the microphone because you're even farther back than everybody else.
JUROR: Hello.
THE COURT: Hello.
JUROR: It's an estranged uncle of mine. He was -- I was in middle school and high school, so that had to have been like at least 15 years ago.
THE COURT: Fifteen?
JUROR: About there probably.
THE COURT: Got it. And where was that?
JUROR: It was here, I know in Florida. I know he's been arrested several times. I'm going to guess some of them were in Orange County. But I don't talk to him. My mother does talk to him.
THE COURT: Okay. Do you have any knowledge if he went to court in any of those --
JUROR: He did. My understanding is he has two felonies.
THE COURT: Okay. Do you know if he was represented by an attorney?
JUROR: I do not.
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge as to whether he was treated fairly through those processes?
JUROR: Yeah. He did that stuff.
THE COURT: Okay. Your uncle's experience 15-some-odd years ago, both here in Orange County and other places in Florida, will that have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
Anyone else on my left, you or an immediate family member been arrested? Please raise your paddles. Court sees no paddles.
Moving over here to my right. Juror in Seat No. 8, yes, sir?
JUROR: My brother was arrested last year for assault, but not in Florida. It was a state out west. And he was represented by an attorney. Charges were dropped. It was proved to be self-defense.
THE COURT: Do you believe he was treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: From what I know, yes.
THE COURT: Would your brother's -- do you recall where out west, sir?
JUROR: I don't. I just barely learned about it a couple weeks ago.
THE COURT: Okay. Your brother's experience in the criminal justice system in the western part of our fine United States, is that going to impact your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: No, sir.
THE COURT: Thank you very much.
Moving to juror in Seat 22. Yes, ma'am?
JUROR: Yes. My brother was arrested in New York City in the Bronx the day before his wedding. And he got -- I don't know what he got arrested for, so I really don't know. But he made it to the wedding on time.
THE COURT: At least he got there on time.
JUROR: And he got arrested in Kosovo over in my country also. I don't know where he got arrested over there because I don't have contact with my family for 25 years. I just hear from my mom.
THE COURT: Okay. Do you know when the New York arrest happened and when the Kosovo arrest happened?
JUROR: No. In New York City, it's been more than 20-something years.
THE COURT: Okay. And was the other arrest before or after that?
JUROR: After that.
THE COURT: Okay.
JUROR: Recently in Kosovo.
THE COURT: How recent is recent?
JUROR: Two years ago.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. With regard to the arrest in New York City, do you know if he went to court?
JUROR: He did not. I don't know nothing about it. I just know he made it to -- I was a very young lady, around 19. I really don't know.
THE COURT: Your brother's arrest in New York City, is that going to have any impact on your ability to be fair and impartial in this case?
JUROR: No. No.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you, ma'am.
Juror in Seat 26?
JUROR: Yes, Your Honor. I was pulled over for speeding by a state police, Florida State Police in Polk County, and was processed in Bartow. Once he ran my driver's license, it turns out I had a suspended driver's license, so I was processed at the Bartow Police Department, and then ROR'd. I went to court and represented myself and came back with a current license and the judge dismissed the charges.
THE COURT: Do you believe you were treated fairly through that process, sir?
JUROR: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Your own experience in the criminal justice system in Polk County, is that going to have any impact on your ability to be a fair and impartial juror in this case?
JUROR: No, sir.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, sir.
Juror in Seat 27?
JUROR: Yes, Your Honor. I was arrested, but I was a juvenile --
COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. I can't hear you.
THE COURT: We're going to hand you that microphone. Madam Court Reporter is having a difficult time hearing you.
JUROR: When I was 16, I was arrested for violating probation, and that was out of state. Also, my father, maybe 25 years ago, was arrested also out of state.
THE COURT: Which state?
JUROR: New York State.
THE COURT: In New York?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. And, sir, with regard to your father, did he go to court?
JUROR: Yes, he did.
THE COURT: Was he represented by an attorney?
JUROR: As far as I know, he was.
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge as to whether or not he was treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: I would assume so.
THE COURT: Okay. And with regard to yourself, Sir, did you go to a juvenile facility or juvenile court?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Were you ever represented by an attorney?
JUROR: Yes, I was.
THE COURT: And do you believe you were treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Your own experience and your father's experience in the criminal justice system in New York, be it adult or juvenile, is that going to have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, sir.
Juror in Seat 38?
JUROR: Hello.
THE COURT: Yes, sir?
JUROR: How are you?
THE COURT: Let's use the microphone with you as well.
JUROR: Okay.
THE COURT: You got it. Thank you, sir. What happened?
JUROR: My brother was arrested back in Pittsburgh in about 2008, 2009.
THE COURT: All right. Did he go to court, sir?
JUROR: As far as I know he did, yes.
THE COURT: Was he represented by an attorney?
JUROR: Sure. I'm not too familiar. I was younger, so -- but yes.
THE COURT: All right. And do you have any knowledge as to whether or not he was treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: I would say so, yeah.
THE COURT: Okay. Your brother's experience in the criminal justice system in Pittsburgh, is that going to have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, sir.
Juror in Seat 39?
JUROR: Yes. Hello.
THE COURT: Yes, ma'am?
JUROR: My stepbrother and stepfather were both arrested previously.
THE COURT: When and where?
JUROR: My stepbrother, I believe it was probably about 20, 30 years ago.
THE COURT: Okay. And your stepmother?
JUROR: Stepfather.
THE COURT: Your stepfather and stepbrother?
JUROR: Correct.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Your stepfather, how long ago was that?
JUROR: Probably about 15 years ago.
THE COURT: Where was that?
JUROR: In Orange County. Well, for my stepfather, it was in Orange County, but for my stepbrother, I believe it was in Virginia and then he was transferred somewhere else, New Jersey.
THE COURT: He was transferred from Virginia to where?
JUROR: I think New Jersey.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. And do you have any knowledge as to whether either of them went to court, be it in Virginia, New York, or here?
JUROR: My stepbrother went to court -- I was in college at the time, but he went to court. However, I don't believe that he had an attorney that was -- that we paid for, that the family paid for, so he was probably represented by, you know, a public defender.
THE COURT: Okay. And what about your father -- your stepfather? Excuse me.
JUROR: I can't remember. I just know that I posted the bail.
THE COURT: Okay. Do you have any knowledge as to whether both of them were treated fairly?
JUROR: I don't think that my stepbrother was treated fairly. He served 27 years.
THE COURT: What about your father?
JUROR: I believe he was.
THE COURT: Your brother's experience and father's experience in the criminal justice system, will that have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: I don't know.
THE COURT: Okay. Well --
JUROR: I don't know because, like I said, they were two different experiences and I saw each experience differently.
THE COURT: Okay. All right, ma'am. I appreciate that. The lawyers may have some follow up with you on that. Thank you.
40?
JUROR: Hello.
THE COURT: Hello.
JUROR: My dad and my sister have been arrested.
THE COURT: Where was -- when and where with your father?
JUROR: My dad was in New York City, late '90s, for narcotics. And my sister was about six years ago for a domestic violence dispute.
THE COURT: And where was your sister's arrest?
JUROR: Here in Orange County.
THE COURT: Okay. Did your father go to court in the late '90s?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Was he represented by an attorney?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge as to whether he was treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: Yes. I mean, he did it, so lI guess, yes, he was.
THE COURT: Same question with regard to your Sister. Was she represented by an attorney?
JUROR: She was.
THE COURT: And do you have any knowledge as to whether she was treated fairly?
JUROR: It was a mutual fight between her and her boyfriend. Only she got reprehended and he didn't. But she was in the fight, so I guess, yes.
THE COURT: Okay. Your sister's experience and your father's experience in the criminal justice system here and in New York, is that going to have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: No. I can separate the both.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
Juror in Seat 48?
JUROR: I was arrested in 2009 in Osceola County. I was represented by an attorney. I was treated fairly.
THE COURT: Okay. Your own experience, sir, in Osceola County, is that going to have an impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: None whatsoever.
THE COURT: None whatsoever?
JUROR: Correct.
THE COURT: Thank you, sir.
JUROR: You're welcome.
THE COURT: Juror in Seat 49?
JUROR: In 1979, I was involved in a DUI single-car accident. I waived counsel and threw myself on the mercy of the court.
THE COURT: Sir, do you believe you were treated fairly through that process?
JUROR: Absolutely.
THE COURT: And where was that, sir?
JUROR: Spokane, Washington.
THE COURT: Okay. Your experience with the criminal justice system in Washington State, will that have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: It will not.
THE COURT: Thank you, sir.
And 53?
JUROR: Hello.
THE COURT: Afternoon.
JUROR: I had some cousins and an uncle that were arrested.
THE COURT: Okay. When and where?
JUROR: Late '80s, early '90s, in Tllinois and Colombia.
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge as to whether they went to court in Illinois?
JUROR: They did.
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge as to whether they were represented by an attorney?
JUROR: I believe they were.
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge as to whether they were treated fairly?
JUROR: I don't know. I was in college.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. Your cousin and uncle's experience in the criminal justice system in the State of Illinois, will that have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: No impact.
THE COURT: Do you have any knowledge as to their experiences in the Colombian criminal justice system?
JUROR: It was a lot different than here.
THE COURT: I'm just asking if you know anything about it, that's all.
JUROR: They were -- I don't know. They went to -- he went to a special jail.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you, ma'am.
Members of our panel, at this time I'm going to -- oh, 52, yes?
JUROR: Sorry, Your Honor. I didn't respond earlier because it was ancient history and I had forgotten.
THE COURT: Okay.
JUROR: My father was arrested in the 1970s --
THE COURT: Okay.
JUROR: -- in Orange County. It was -- he was selling stolen vehicles, so it was a federal case. He was represented by an attorney. As far as I know, he was treated fairly. I was a teenager and I don't really know all the details.
THE COURT: Is your father's experience in the federal justice system going to have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: No, I don't remember anything much about it.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
And I thought I saw 12 or 13? Yes, ma'am, Juror No. 13?
JUROR: Yes. I also didn't raise earlier. I don't know if this counts, but my ex-husband has been arrested.
THE COURT: Yes.
JUROR: It's actually a pending -- testing, testing -- it's a pending case. So I guess I wanted to let the Court know. I doubt that a court date will be set within this trial but, if so, I intend to testify in that case.
THE COURT: Okay. And where is that case pending?
JUROR: Orange County.
THE COURT: All right. Do you know if he's represented by an attorney?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Do you know what the charges are?
JUROR: Domestic battery.
THE COURT: Okay. And to the best of your knowledge, is he being treated fairly currently?
JUROR: To my knowledge, yes.
THE COURT: Your brother's current --
JUROR: Ex-husband. Ex-husband.
THE COURT: Your ex-husband's current experience in the criminal justice system here in Orange County, is that going to have any impact on your ability to fairly and impartially weigh the evidence in this case?
JUROR: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you very much.
Just one last sweep, anyone else, you or immediate family member has been arrested? Go ahead and raise those paddles if I've missed you. Court sees no paddles.
All right. Members of our jury, at this time, I'm going to go ahead and turn over questioning to the State.
THE COURT: Yes.
(At the bench.)
THE COURT: Yes, sir.
MR. JAY: For cause on 20 before we start. I'm concerned of any potential answers she might give during voir dire based on what she said.
THE COURT: That's on my notes.
MR. HENDERSON: What did -- I'm sorry. I didn't hear what you said.
THE COURT: Her concerns, when I addressed the criminal concept of sitting in judgment and how Jesus Christ can only judge. Any objection?
MR. HENDERSON: No objection.
THE COURT: So stipulate?
MR. HENDERSON: Yeah.
THE COURT: All right. So juror in Seat 21, wearing Badge 294, will be stricken for cause by way of stipulation.
Any other cause challenges from the State at this time?
THE COURT: Any other cause challenges at this time?
MR. HENDERSON: Judge, just don't have enough information. I ama little concerned of Juror No. 27, the one with the ex-husband, who is currently --
THE COURT: That's Juror No. 13, sir.
MR. HENDERSON: I have a little concern because I don't know if she's potentially the alleged victim in that case.
THE COURT: Well, we can find that out. So I'm not seeing a cause basis at this point in time. I understand your concerns, and either the State or you can vet that out, but I'm not seeing a cause basis at this time.
MR. HENDERSON: I understand.
THE COURT: Okay. Anything else?
THE COURT: All right. You want to go ahead and do that now and then we can politely excuse 20?
THE COURT: Okay. Perfect. All right. Thank you.
(In open court.)
THE COURT: All right. Members of our jury, it is 2:48. We're going to go ahead and take a short recess at this time because the State is going to ask you some questions for a little bit.
Similar instruction I've given you over the last couple of days. There's still no case. We may know what the charge is, but there's no facts before you. So please don't talk amongst yourselves or anyone else about the case, the persons, the places, the charge, or the things that are involved. And don't conduct any independent investigation or research. We're going to ask you to come back at 3:00 o'clock, all right? Thank you very much.
(Venire Panel 5 exited, except for Venire Badge 58.)
THE COURT: You-all can be seated. Thank you.
I've been advised from a note from the deputy that juror in Seat 30 has some questions.
Sir, if you want to move right in front of where Madam Court Reporter is.
COURT STAFF: Is it 30, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Juror in Seat 20, Badge 294, is going to be dismissed. But juror in Seat 30, wearing Badge 58, has some questions.
Yes, sir?
JUROR: So, with all due respect, I know we talked about this yesterday regarding my condition and experience with all of this. I did get in touch with my office manager yesterday, working in the health care system, just having this two-week long trial of sporadic scheduling. I feel uncomfortable in regards to updating my patients, having to call them and cancel their appointments and reschedule them. And I know yesterday you're asking -- right now when you're saying are you able to partially make sound judgments, and, honestly, with not having enough PTO to take two weeks off and, like, having to sort of schedule, as well as kind of stressed out about, like, the next time I need to come in and have to call patients for cancelations, I personally don't feel like I can be part of the jury panel.
THE COURT: When you -- I recall us speaking yesterday, and you were going to speak to your employer as to how much, if any, of your jury service that would be covered. How much, if any, is covered, sir?
JUROR: I do work for a corporate dental office, and even with that, my manager and I did do some research today before coming in here, and it turns out that there's zero coverage, I will have to use my own personal PTO, if I want to get some coverage. And even if I did want to, I did the math with my account and I don't have enough to be able to cover for all of this. Like, for today especially, like, the times that I missed, I will not get time off.
And then also, like, calling after 5:00, because we close at 5:00, so calling in after 5:00 to figure out when the next time I will be needed is unfair to both the office and the patients and myself to have to call the next following morning to tell them that the appointment that they have made for that time, and even though they confirmed like a few weeks before and Say, Hey, actually, we can't see you today. So it's kind of too chaotic for, me, my office, and my patients.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, sir.
State, any follow up?
THE COURT: Defense, any follow up?
MR. HENDERSON: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Can you-all approach for a moment?
(At the bench.)
THE COURT: State, what say you?
MR. HENDERSON: Stipulate.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you-all very much.
(In open court.)
THE COURT: All right. I've had the opportunity to discuss you specifically with the State and the defense. We're going to go ahead and excuse you, sir, from jury service in this matter. You can head back down to the first floor of jury services, they will validate your parking and give you any additional instructions, and I thank you for your time.
JUROR: Thank you very much.
(Venire Badge 58 exited.)
THE COURT: Juror in Seat 20, afternoon, ma'am.
JUROR: Hi.
THE COURT: I've also had the opportunity -- you can just hang out right there where you're at. You're good. I've also had the opportunity to speak with both the State and defense regarding your service as well. We're going to excuse you as well. Same instructions, head back on down to the first floor, juror services, they'll validate your parking and give you anything else. Thank you very much.
JUROR: Thank you.
THE COURT: You can leave your paddle behind.
(Venire Badge 294 exited.)
THE COURT: For the record, juror in Seat 21, Badge 294, and juror in Seat 30, wearing Badge 58, have both been stricken for cause by way of stipulation.
State, anything else we need to address?
THE COURT: Defense?
MR. HENDERSON: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Now, State, you advised yesterday that you believe you would be two to two and a half hours. Is that still where we're at?
THE COURT: Okay. Do we want to inquire of our panel of staying slightly after 5:00? Because if it's two and a half hours, that takes us to 5:30.
THE COURT: You just want to go?
THE COURT: All right. Fair enough.
All right. We'll see you-all in five minutes. Thank you.
(Recess from 2:54 p.m. to 3:03 p.m.)
THE COURT: You-all can be seated.
We're back on the record in 2020-CF-2603, State of Florida vs. Sarah Boone.
State?
MR. CACCIATORE: Dave Cacciatore on behalf of the State.
THE COURT: Defense?
MR. OWENS: James Owens for the defense.
MR. HENDERSON: Tony Henderson for the defense.
THE COURT: Ms. Boone is standing at counsel's table wearing the same clothes from earlier in the day. She is in custody, however, she is not shackled. We'll continue to stand when our juror panel enters and exits.
It's been brought to my attention by the courtroom deputy that jurors in Seats 22 and 38 know each other. I did not inquire of anyone to look around to see if they acknowledged anyone. I will be asking that question when our panel reenters, and I'll specifically ask 22 and 38 who they -- how they recognize each other, and if it's going to have any impact.
Anything else, State?
THE COURT: Defense?
MR. HENDERSON: No, You r Honor.
THE COURT: Let's stand and bring in our panel.
COURT STAFF: It's Sea t 9 and 13.
COURT CLERK: Oh, it's not Juror 9 and Juror 13? Okay. So it's Seat 9 and 13
THE COURT: Oh, okay. Thank you. So it's not 22 and 38? So 9 and 13 know ea ch other. Okay. Thank you.
(Venire Panel 5 entered -)
THE COURT: State, do y ou recognize our panel?
THE COURT: All right. Deputy Bruce is giving me a thumbs up that we've got everybody.
Defense, do you recogni ze our panel?
MR. HENDERSON: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you.
You-all can be seated.
The only thing I forgot to ask, because I've seen so many of you since Monday, could you-all do me a favor and take a look around and amongst yourselves, right, left, front, center. Does any recognize anyone? Okay. I see: 9, 13, 38 -- hang on. 9, 13, 24, 38, and 51 on my right.
Anyone over here on my left, do you recognize anyone sitting near or around you? Juror No. 3 and 2.
Let's start with you 2. How do you-all recognize each other?
JUROR: Monday.
THE COURT: Okay. You were on the panel on Monday? Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate you both.
Moving over here to my right. Juror No. 9 and 13, same reason or different reason?
JUROR: We work together.
THE COURT: Really? That's completely random.
Do you-all do anything outside of work?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Do you spend time with each other?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Okay. What was that, Juror No. 13?
JUROR: Asking what she was doing tonight.
THE COURT: That's fair. Is the fact that -- if both of you were seated on our jury, is the fact that you work together going to have any impact on your ability to follow and listen to the evidence? Juror No. 9?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Juror No. 13?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Is that going to have any impact on your ability to be fair and impartial, Juror No. 9?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Juror No. 13?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you very much.
Juror 24, who might you recognize, sir? Is that Juror No. 25?
JUROR: From Monday.
THE COURT: Okay. Juror No. 25 doesn't recognize you.
JUROR: That was on Monday.
THE COURT: Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.
Juror 38, who do you recognize, sir?
JUROR: 35, 37 --
THE COURT: Is that because they were all on the panel with you earlier?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: Appreciate you, sir.
Juror No. 51?
JUROR: There was a woman, I don't see her now. She is in law school, I think, but she briefly volunteered in an organization that I volunteered at. I don't know her name, but I think she looked familiar to me.