Agitation Amongst the Jury

A trial that's been extremely turbulent so far looks like it's going to experience an appropriately dramatic endgame.

As the jury in Senator Stevens' blockbuster corruption trial entered deliberations late last week, it seemed as though the trial was finally approaching its terminus on relatively smooth ground after being rocked by a never-ending series of legal potholes, including more than one near mistrial.

That calm lasted about two hours.

First, Justice Sullivan (who has undoubtedly earned a vacation after this trial is over) received a note from jurors complaining that a member of the jury was prone to "violent outbursts" and was creating a toxic situation for the other eleven jurors. Sullivan gave the jurors a "pep talk," reminding them of the importance of their duty, and the possible difficulties therein. The jurors then returned to work.

However, progress was halted again after Juror #4 unexpectedly, well, left, citing a family emergency. It took some time, but it was eventually discovered that her father had died, and she had returned to California.

At this point, the promised pre-election finish of this trial is in serious doubt. The jury is set to proceed with a backup juror if necessary, but they will be cutting it very close indeed, especially in a case as contentious and complicated as this one has been.

All in all, every fresh juror trouble is good news for Stevens: it's becoming less and less likely every day that a jury as fractured as this one has become will be able to attain the unanimity needed for a conviction. This could backfire, however, if the delays mount up further and the trial isn't resolved by November 4th, and voters go to the polls with Stevens' innocence or guilt up in the air--and on their minds.

(NB: For some insight as to what Alaskans are thinking at this point, this off-the-cuff editorial in the Miner serves as a decent approximation as any.)