Jackson Free Press

This story was substantially updated at 8:30 p.m. For further updates, see the comments below or scroll down in the story.

Calling out with a voice that could herd cats, Circuit Clerk Barbara Dunn swore in prospective jurors this morning in the courtroom of Judge Joe Webster, kicking off the felony trial of Mayor Frank Melton and police detectives Michael Recio and Marcus Wright. By the end of the day, Dunn swore in the jurors who will actually hear the case, who were eight African-American women, three white women and one white man. The alternates were one African-American female and one white female.

Opening statements are set to begin at 9 a.m. Tuesday morning.

This morning, Judge Joe Webster announced that the jury will be sequestered, and he vowed that the jury would be impaneled by the end of the day.

Melton and Recio attended all day, but Wright did not appear until the afternoon. City employee Stephanie Parker-Weaver watched most of the morning's proceedings from the press balcony, and Police Chief Shirlene Anderson later joined her, returning for the afternoon session. City Attorney Sarah O'Reilly-Evans attended. Sheriff Malcolm McMillin was dressed in a black suit and sat next to Wright.

Webster seemed in high spirits as the trial began. During a brief recess, he removed his robes, which he left casually draped over his chair as he engaged in animated conversation with Dunn. He was dressed business casual, in pleated khaki pants, a light blue shirt and a yellow tie.

Throughout the morning, Webster was determined to keep jury selection moving quickly, at one point urging Dunn to read more than one name at a time and expressing frustration with jurors who failed to listen carefully to his questions.

Many potential jurors asked to be excused after Webster announced the jury would be sequestered. "This is going to be a case where you get to go on a little vacation," Webster told the jury around 9:30 a.m. "We have excellent accommodations for you. You'll be pampered and fed well."

Webster said jurors should expect to be away from home for "three or four days." He warned them that mere inconvenience was not an adequate excuse, but he ultimately excused 42 of 44 jurors who objected to sequestration. He refused requests from two students to be excused because they are studying for finals. "Have someone bring you your books," Webster recommended, but he relented after a teacher asked to be excused, too. "All right, he got you out of it," Webster said to the students, though he refused to excuse a third student. "You've only got one class," he said. "You'll be fine."

After a lunch recess, Juror No. 20 was late, prompting Webster to launch into an improvised lesson on the different types of courts in Hinds County, "to pass time," he said. When the late juror returned, Webster interrupted himself, remarking, "Well, now that (he) has returned, y'all are gonna be spared having to hear about the circuit and chancery courts."

Webster then had the prosecutors and defense attorneys introduce themselves. Melton had at least five attorneys, while Recio and Wright each had one. Defense attorneys introduced prospective jurors to the defendants, each of whom stood briefly. Wright and Recio were impassive throughout the day, while Melton slouched or hunched forward, his hands clasped.

The judge ran through several questions with prospective jurors, asking them to raise their fans, which were printed with their juror numbers, if they were a blood relative of the defendants. Webster also asked whether jurors knew him, the defendants or the attorneys personally, and whether they had already formed an opinion as to a verdict.

He excused one prospective juror who knew Melton because the mayor had attended his grandfather's funeral, along with another who said she was friends with District Attorney Faye Peterson.

Webster was careful not to allow prospective jurors to taint each other, insisting that they answer most questions with a simple yes or no.

He also asked prospective jurors whether they had followed pre-trial media coverage about the defendants. All but one of the prospective jurors indicated that they had seen some news on the indictments, but most indicated it would not sway them in reaching a verdict. Webster also asked if prospective jurors could set aside "what you feel the law should be, and accept and be governed by the instructions of the court."

At midday, there were still 85 potential jurors, 39 of them African-American females, 13 African-American males, 17 white females and 15 white males.

Prospective jurors' ages ranged from 21 to 73, though the majority were in their 40s or 50s. Nearly all prospective jurors were long-term Hinds County residents, the majority of them from either northeast Jackson or south Jackson, though at least two were from west Jackson. Others were from areas of Hinds County outside of Jackson, especially Byram and Clinton.

Their education level and employment also varied widely. Some had as little as a 9th grade education, while others held advanced degrees. The majority of prospective jurors had some college. Some were retired, while one was a butcher, another a social worker, and several others were either nurses or school teachers. One was a doctor, and another was an aerospace engineer.

Senior Assistant DA Stanley Alexander read out the indictments against the defendants. Melton and Wright are each charged with malicious mischief, burglary, conspiracy to commit malicious mischief, conspiracy to commit burglary, and causing or directing a minor to commit a felony, all felonies. Recio is charged with each of those counts except burglary.

Webster gave each set of attorneys 45 minutes to interrogate jurors, a process lawyers call voir dire, or "speak the truth." Both sides used voir dire to seek information and to frame the issues.

Assistant DA Dewey Arthur spoke for prosecutors. He began by asking prospective jurors if they agreed that everyone should be treated equally under the law. He asked a series of questions about reasonable doubt, asking jurors whether they understood that requiring proof "to a moral certainty, or beyond a shadow of a doubt" was stricter than reasonable doubt.

Several prospective jurors had relatives who had been prosecuted by the district attorney's office, but they did not feel this would make them unfair.

Arthur asked if jurors could set aside what they had seen on television. He asked if prospective jurors would disbelieve "anything a person says just because they were convicted of a felony." This probably relates to Evans Welch, who lived at the home at 1305 Ridgeway and has a criminal history.

"Does everyone understand that police are humans too?" Arthur asked next. "Just because you put on a badge doesn't make you more believable."

Arthur noted that police officers are "professional witnesses" who are trained to give testimony, and he asked prospective jurors if they could evaluate testimony fairly even if it was delivered by someone who was "unpolished."

Finally, he asked if any of the prospective jurors owned rental property. At least two owned duplexes in Jackson.

Merrida Coxwell Jr. conducted voir dire for Melton. He asked whether anyone had had negative experiences with law enforcement officers. Several prospective jurors said they had.

Coxwell then asked if any read or made comments on media blogs, specifically the Jackson Free Press. One prospective juror said he had read the JFP online. Coxwell asked if any had read the JFP in print, describing it as a "little magazine they have outside grocery stores." Altogether, two prospective jurors said they had read articles about the defendants in the JFP, and Webster said attorneys could question them in chambers.

He asked about The Clarion-Ledger, and two said they had read stories on its Web site.

Coxwell returned several times to the media with prospective jurors, asking them if they had formed negative opinions based on media coverage, had they seen a WLBT special on drug sales on Ridgeway, had they formed any negative opinion on the mayor taking a "personal approach to crime."

Webster warned Coxwell after the last question, telling him it was far as he would allow him to go "along those lines."

Coxwell asked if any prospective jurors lived near 1305 Ridgeway and if they had been victims of crime. He asked if they understood that presumption of innocence meant that even if a defendant "chooses not to testify, whether for health reasons or on advise of counsel, you are not to draw any unfavorable conclusion?"

At around 4 p.m., Coxwell asked Webster how much time he had left to ask questions. "You've got about 10 minutes left," Webster said, "but we hope you don't use it."

Next, Robert Smith conducted voir dire for Wright. He asked how many prospective jurors have families and children. "How many of you have called the police? How many think the police should come when you call them?"

Webster stopped Smith there. "I don't think that's an appropriate line of voir dire," Webster said.

Smith then mentioned a case he had lost. Afterward, one of the jurors asked him why the defense had not called a witness that could tie the defense's case together. He said it wasn't the job of defense attorneys to fill in all the holes, as that burden was on the prosecution. "You understand that if you are left with questions, that is reasonable doubt," he said.

Arthur objected for the prosecution. "He can't instruct the jury on reasonable doubt, your honor," he said.

"Don't argue the case," Webster muttered to Smith, and Smith deferred to the questions Coxwell had asked.

Winston Thomas III conducted voir dire for Recio. He reminded prospective jurors one more time that the burden of proof was on the state.

Update posted at 10:08 p.m.

Webster then dismissed most prospective jurors to the halls and called back some individually, including Juror No. 23, who said he had read the JFP's blog.

Webster had already said to this prospective juror: "I promise you you're not going to be chosen." But when Juror No. 23, an African-American male, told Coxwell that he had mostly read actual articles on the blog, "skimming through" the comments, Webster said he might have to retract his earlier statement. The prospective juror said he had never posted a comment.

Coxwell asked if articles in the JFP had a negative attitude toward the mayor, but No. 23 said that "some were favorable, some were unfavorable."

Coxwell asked No. 23 if he also read The Clarion-Ledger, and he said he did, though he did not go to their blog.

Finally, No. 23 said his wife works for the city, and Webster dismissed him.

Coxwell also questioned Juror No. 27, a white male, about his admission that he read JFP articles. "I'm distrustful of all media," No. 27 said. Former mayor Dale Danks, who is an attorney for Melton, swept his hand across the 10 members of the media assembled in the balcony.

Webster dismissed that juror because a relative worked for the city.

Attorneys from both sides questioned Juror No. 47, an African-American female who lives "about four blocks" from 1305 Ridgeway. Webster determined that she could remain in the jury.

Juror No. 34, an African-American female, said she was uncomfortable because she was a psychiatric nurse. She was preoccupied by work because they were facing an important inspection, she said, and she felt uncomfortable when she saw Melton because "he looked unhealthy."

Alexander asked if he was rough with Melton in cross-examination, would No. 34 hold it against him because of the mayor's poor health?

"Probably," she admitted, and Webster dismissed her.

Each side then submitted jurors they accepted and those they wished to eliminate without explanation. Each side got six vetoes.

Around 5:15 p.m., Webster called the pool of prospective jurors back into the courtroom. He thanked them for their service and called out the 14 jurors who will hear the felony trial of Melton, Wright and Recio.

This story has been corrected since it was first posted.

Previous Comments

ID

127331

Comment

Wow, if they get to the opening statements today, I'll be in a state of shock and awe. Keep the updates coming!

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T09:30:27-06:00

ID

127332

Comment

Yes, please keep the updates coming. Some of us are sequestered to a desk hopelessly waiting till quiting time! Thanks in advance.

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-23T09:33:23-06:00

ID

127333

Comment

Let us know what the millieu is like. I know that McMillan said that it would not be a circus or a zoo outside of the court house.

Author

justjess

Date

2007-04-23T10:48:28-06:00

ID

127334

Comment

We will. Brian will come back to post a detailed update when they break. You can't go in and out of the courtroom at will.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-04-23T10:49:37-06:00

ID

127335

Comment

GREAT!!!!

Author

justjess

Date

2007-04-23T11:04:56-06:00

ID

127336

Comment

Oh wow.... CourtTV just had a blurb on Melton. WOW.

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-04-23T11:35:38-06:00

ID

127337

Comment

They said this is his second criminal trial in less than 6 months after Melton pleaded guilty to misdemeanor gun charges in November. They also said he was facing some number of years in jail and removal from office.

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-04-23T11:37:29-06:00

ID

127338

Comment

LawClerk, if Melton is found guilty, I'm sure sure we'll hear a lot more than that. Oh boy.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T11:45:28-06:00

ID

127339

Comment

if one "can't go in and out of courtrfoom at will," how and when can a person go in and out of the courtroom? Please advise.

Author

jasp

Date

2007-04-23T12:37:26-06:00

ID

127340

Comment

The prosecution is probably going to have a hard time getting a jury who is in their corner and totally anti-Frank Melton. What types of jurors do each side wants for this case? How much does the black community still believes in and symphathizes with Frank? Too much for my taste. What percentage of the white community has Frank lost with his renegade actions over the last two years? Who know the answer to this? Consequently, I would need individual voir dire and would pick jurors solely on the answers given, written and oral. Broad stereotypes of the usual order about race, gender, socio-economic groups, and so on, won't work in picking a jury for this case. Are males or females more open the the strategies of the defense, i.e Frank is a good man trying to stop crime in an unusual way, these violations are not worth going to jail for or losing your job over, very little harm was done and can be easily fixed, et al. When it comes down to sympathy which is impermissible in the deliberation of these types of cases who is more likely to have it anyway, men or women? If it becomes a question of following the law, orders and rules, for everyone (including the mayor), who is more likely to be stricter law and order persons, males or females, old or young? Who would professionals or non-professional persons favor, Frank or the government. If I were the prosecution I would pick the so-called professionals assuming they would be the law, order, and rule-following type. As the defense I would pick the opposite. I would likely pick old folks too if I were the prosecution. I can't wait to see who they pick and whether Faye Peterson will show up or participate.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-23T12:46:23-06:00

ID

127341

Comment

Ray, you raise good questions. The trouble with this case is that I have seen the people that should be upset over Melton's actions actually supporting him. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to who is supporting Melton. This is definitely going to be interesting.

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-23T12:54:41-06:00

ID

127342

Comment

I don't understand much of the support either, given that he hasn't done anything of substance for the good of this city. In fact, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what he has done. I'll be here humming, tapping my feet to the desk and foot to the floor until then.

Author

golden eagle '97

Date

2007-04-23T13:15:22-06:00

ID

127343

Comment

I'm struck by the fact that there are so many women, and most are black. I'm usually happy to see women as jurors except when it's a rape or child abuse case. They will tear you a new one on these types of cases unless clearly innocent. Men will too, but seem less strident or bothered. Women can be quite sympathetic and rescuing to defendants if they think the system is trying to abuse a person. Black women can be especially rescuing of a black male when they think he's being done wrong. Black males can be equally anti-systen when it comes to this. This is why I'm surprised Frank doesn't have a very charismatic black lawyer on his team. Merrida is very easy to like and be endeared too. However, I still would have picked an equally talented and likeable black lawyer to help, just in case. I realize people don't like to talk about race but it's often an unstated or tacit consideration. Prosecutors won't admit it, but when the defendant is black they try to pick people who identify less or not at all with the defendant. The problem here is that Melton is rich and powerful as the mayor of Jackson therefore even the white males and females may feel some great or unusual affinity for Melton. This begs the question of what kinds of white jurors does the prosecution wants, rich or poor, professional or non-professionals, middle calss or what? What type will like or identify more with Melton, Danks and Coxwell? In case anyone is asking why I'm fixated on matters other than the facts? My answer is because good lawyers make the facts the least prevailing or dominat issues of the case. If both sides do their jobs well the facts should be made so blurry that no one will really know exactly what they are. When the facts aren't clear and overriding these other things become the deciding factors.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-23T13:24:56-06:00

ID

127344

Comment

I should add that I'm not suggesting women are easy. I'm giving my opinion that I believe they're very humane. Another question. Who would be the "by any means necessary" proponents of stopping crime or policing? women, men, black or white, professional or non-professional type?

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-23T13:53:20-06:00

ID

127345

Comment

Potential Melton jurors for the Defense: I wouldn't go for the professional types. Like with all cases, this is about the elements of the crime. Professional types, despite their feelings about Frank "by any means necessary" Melton will more likely adhere to the elements of the crime, whereas less educated individuals will gloss over the levels of proof.

Author

Ole Miss Alum

Date

2007-04-23T13:58:27-06:00

ID

127346

Comment

I have served on several jurys in this state over the past 30 years. You can talk "professional/non-professional" until you are blue in the face; however, it depends on the judge and the tone and spirit that the case is presented. The jury foreman can make or break a case. Usually, the person selected is one preceived by the group as a "leader type" with some ability to speak and with an understanding of the issues. This case should be open and shut. It should have only one thing to prove, that: frank melton, his body guards and with the help of some minors, viciously distroyed a rental property owned by a law abiding tax payer.

Author

justjess

Date

2007-04-23T14:56:46-06:00

ID

127347

Comment

wapt and wlbt are reporting that they will have live trial coverage! that is awesome!

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-04-23T15:12:26-06:00

ID

127348

Comment

They are? Great! Now I can be nosy in the comfort of my own home.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T15:20:06-06:00

ID

127349

Comment

We will see, Justjess. A friend of mine who is a lawyer in Greenville got picked to serve on a criminal prosecution. And he got picked as the foreman. He did take over and bullcrap the jury into deliberating for 3 days additional days instead of a few hours. He wanted them to convict on one charge and acquit on all others, and they wanted to convict on all charges. Before it was all said and done they were cursing him out and he gave in to save face and his reputation. I don't know how he got picked. I have tried many times to get picked but was always sent packing. Even when I didn't do criminal cases the prosecution wouldn't pick me. I bet I have that set them free look on my face which doesn't really reflect my true opinion about crime at all. Judge Webster is a very good judge and may not take any crap. However, personally, I would do everything the law and rules allowed despite the judge's wishes to proceed steadfastly. These lawyers are too talented to let this case be simply opened and shut. Frank has spent good money to make sure this doesn't happen. Opened and shut can work both ways too, guilt or acquittal.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-23T15:30:41-06:00

ID

127350

Comment

BTW, does anyone think there's a possibility that Melton may plead no contest again, or do you think he thinks he has this one "in the bag"?

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T15:33:12-06:00

ID

127351

Comment

My money is on him not pleading. Like Charles Evers, he doesn't believe a jury will convict him for that. I'm worried about that too.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-23T15:42:42-06:00

ID

127352

Comment

The State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson was supposed to be opened and shut too, but all that talent overcame that awesome evidence.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-23T15:51:55-06:00

ID

127353

Comment

I took a year off and watched the State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson and you are on target with your assessment of the talent presented for the defense. Chris Darden, Marsha Clark and others from the prosecution wer simply out lawyered. This case was argues up the wazoo and back and basically the racial divide ended it. For the defense, there was no eye witness. When everything is said and all is done, no one saw OJ kill those people. ALL evidence was circumstantial. Then there was racist, Mark Furman, who laid a golden egg for the defense. There are several eye-witnesses to frank and his peeps tearing that lwoman's house down. frank did it. He knows that he did it and I hope the judge nor jury won't give a dam# about WHY he did it.

Author

justjess

Date

2007-04-23T16:13:15-06:00

ID

127354

Comment

Excellent comment, Justjess. Can they prove he directed others by words, gestures, commands, etc., and can they show his personal actions of touching or hitting the building or any part thereof amounted to a destroying or destructive act? I admit I don't know the intimate facts of the case, and can't remember all the charges, but I can't wait to hear them. I'm trying to hang around the office this week just to hear it. There was no eyewitness in OJ's case but there were lots of forensic or scientific evidence connecting him to the crimes, and buttressing that circumstantial evidence. The criminalists or crime scene analysts screwed up a lot of that with contamination. Indeed OJ got lots of luck.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-23T16:24:55-06:00

ID

127355

Comment

Ray, By Melton's own account, he "removed" glass from one of the windows, which he cut his hands on. I guess it depends on how you define "remove."

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-04-23T16:29:13-06:00

ID

127356

Comment

Okay, according to WAPT: He faces five felony charges -- malicious mischief, house burglary, two counts of conspiracy and a charge of directing a minor to commit a felony. Do you think that he may be found not guilty for one or two of them? If so, which ones?

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T16:45:24-06:00

ID

127357

Comment

Melton is an ongoing revisionist! I noticed that Wright wasn't there. That may mean he is really thinking hard about what is about to happen. Melton can walk free. The other two or one could spend some time in jail or face penalties that are expensive and detrimental to being a police officer. I think the jury will be torn, and Melton will get off. He will really mess up once he feels that 'error' of invincibility. Unfortunately, many people may be hurt in the process or even worst.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-04-23T16:49:33-06:00

ID

127358

Comment

You have to think they HAVE to go with the Malicious Mischief charge at the least. Directing a youth will apply more to Melton once the videos show Taylor. BTW: I hope the DA asks if throwing paint all over the house is part of searching a drug house? Also, I think they need to ask some of the 'neighbors' or 'drug users' (former I hope) if they have worked for the City or any of Melton's associates, appointees, etc. or if they hung at YMCA on Fairish. Has Melton ever 'helped' them in some way? Something is fishy when a drug addict is willing to testify in behalf of someone like "a Melton" - a mayor, police chief, FBI agent... That doesn't make sense?

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-04-23T17:10:24-06:00

ID

127359

Comment

Interesting that Wright wasn't there. Will be fun to watch online to see how the Judge controls this one. I'm not sure how the jury will deliberate, but given the comments from potential jurors and passersby on local news tonight I wouldn't be surprised to hear the jury deadlocked. Then again, if the Judge voices his thoughts on what is to be considered and what is not, the jury may have clear guidance in making a decision.

Author

JenniferGriffin

Date

2007-04-23T17:13:32-06:00

ID

127360

Comment

I'd hate to see a hung jury, but that is a BIG possibility.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T17:32:23-06:00

ID

127361

Comment

Oh yeah, when does the trial start tomorrow? 8 AM?

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T17:56:42-06:00

ID

127362

Comment

Note the updates, and I'll have more for you just as soon as I can type them up. For the moment, you might want to know that the trial starts at 9 a.m. tomorrow. Second, it seems the defense lawyers think all you JFP bloggers are radioactive! The second question defense lawyers asked potential jurors was whether or not they read the JFP blogs. More details in a minute.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-04-23T18:28:37-06:00

ID

127363

Comment

Love it, Brian!

Author

JenniferGriffin

Date

2007-04-23T18:48:00-06:00

ID

127364

Comment

Second, it seems the defense lawyers think all you JFP bloggers are radioactive! The second question defense lawyers asked potential jurors was whether or not they read the JFP blogs. Hmmm. Fascinating. Guess they don't want the panel to be too informed.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T18:51:25-06:00

ID

127365

Comment

Second, it seems the defense lawyers think all you JFP bloggers are radioactive! brian

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-04-23T18:51:55-06:00

ID

127366

Comment

Did anybody answer in the affirmative? :)

Author

Lady Havoc

Date

2007-04-23T19:12:46-06:00

ID

127367

Comment

Did anybody answer in the affirmative? :) I think that anyone who did would have thrown out like Jazz was thrown out of the mansion on Fresh Prince. tweet tweet chirp chirp... UGH!

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T19:34:11-06:00

ID

127368

Comment

Where does Michael Taylor come into play? What about the others that were supposedly there?

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-04-23T19:50:15-06:00

ID

127369

Comment

Yeah I heard that only one potential juror answered in the affirmative that they read the JFP blogs. Correct me if I am wrong.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-23T20:03:00-06:00

ID

127370

Comment

I posted a large update at 8:30 p.m. and neglected to mention it here. I am about to post another update, which will come here and at the end of the story.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-04-23T20:56:47-06:00

ID

127371

Comment

No, Shaun, you're right. The way I posted it is misleading, and I'll post a correction momentarily.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-04-23T21:00:10-06:00

ID

127372

Comment

The corrected paragraph reads: Coxwell then asked if any read or made comments on media blogs, specifically the Jackson Free Press. One prospective juror said he had read the JFP online. Coxwell asked if any had read the JFP in print, describing it as a “little magazine they have outside grocery stores.” Altogether, two prospective jurors said they had read articles about the defendants in the JFP, and Webster said attorneys could question them in chambers. The original paragraph read: Coxwell then asked if any read or made comments on media blogs, specifically the Jackson Free Press. Two prospective jurors said they had read the JFP online, and Webster said defense lawyers could ask them more detailed questions in chambers.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-04-23T21:03:10-06:00

ID

127373

Comment

Here's another large update with much more detail about how attorneys questioned prospective jurors individually: Webster then dismissed most prospective jurors to the halls and called back some individually, including Juror No. 23, who said he had read the JFP’s blog. Webster had already said to this prospective juror: “I promise you you’re not going to be chosen.” But when Juror No. 23, an African-American male, told Coxwell that he had mostly read actual articles on the blog, “skimming through” the comments, Webster said he might have to retract his earlier statement. The prospective juror said he had never posted a comment. Coxwell asked if articles in the JFP had a negative attitude toward the mayor, but No. 23 said that “some were favorable, some were unfavorable.” Coxwell asked No. 23 if he also read The Clarion-Ledger, and he said he did, though he did not go to their blog. Finally, No. 23 said his wife works for the city, and Webster dismissed him. Coxwell also questioned Juror No. 27, a white male, about his admission that he read JFP articles. “I’m distrustful of all media,” No. 27 said. Former mayor Dale Danks, who is an attorney for Melton, swept his hand across the 10 members of the media assembled in the balcony. Webster dismissed that juror because a relative worked for the city. Attorneys from both sides questioned Juror No. 47, an African-American female who lives “about four blocks” from 1305 Ridgeway. Webster determined that she could remain in the jury. Juror No. 34, an African-American female, said she was uncomfortable because she was a psychiatric nurse. She was preoccupied by work because they were facing an important inspection, she said, and she felt uncomfortable when she saw Melton because “he looked unhealthy.” Alexander asked if he was rough with Melton, would No. 34 hold it against him because of the mayor’s poor health. “Probably,” she admitted, and Webster dismissed her. Each side then submitted jurors they accepted and those they wished to eliminate without explanation. Each side got six vetoes. Around 5:15 p.m., Webster called the pool of prospective jurors back into the courtroom. He thanked them for their service and called out the 14 jurors who will hear the felony trial of Melton, Wright and Recio.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-04-23T21:09:23-06:00

ID

127374

Comment

Just saw the makeup of the jury. Seems like Melton will indeed walk on this one too. Too bad for Jackson. I was beginning to think they had a chance to move forward.

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-23T21:19:34-06:00

ID

127375

Comment

Just saw the makeup of the jury. Seems like Melton will indeed walk on this one too. Too bad for Jackson. I was beginning to think they had a chance to move forward. kbsjsdfa Though Tom Head ignored the times I have said this; Jackson will/is moving forward. It's just that Melton is a cancer, and we will have to continue to deal with his antics which make it appear as if somedays it is hopeless for Jackson. However, the circle of crime that he is interwined with may ultimately taint the city for a few years until we can get him out.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-04-23T21:26:30-06:00

ID

127376

Comment

I apologize for the length of the updates. It's my best attempt to provide a blow-by-blow of what happened today. I also want to say that I don't want anyone to think that I focused excessively on the JFP. Questions on the JFP really did come at the beginning of Coxwell's questions, and he returned to coverage by the JFP several times. Coxwell even asked one prospective juror if he had formed a negative impression of Danks from reading the JFP. For the record, Danks was dressed immaculately, in a starched white shirt with cuff links and a diaphanous green tie, and the prospective juror said the JFP's coverage would not sway his verdict.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-04-23T21:27:42-06:00

ID

127377

Comment

In the article, you have Bryam instead of Byram. You may want to fix that. :-) At around 4 p.m., Coxwell asked Webster how much time he had left to ask questions. “You’ve got about 10 minutes left,” Webster said, “but we hope you don’t use it.” LOL Next, Robert Smith conducted voir dire for Wright. He asked how many prospective jurors have families and children. “How many of you have called the police? How many think the police should come when you call them?” Webster stopped Smith there. “I don’t think that’s an appropriate line of voir dire,” Webster said. Smith then mentioned a case he had lost. Afterward, one of the jurors asked him why the defense had not called a witness that could tie the defense’s case together. He said it wasn’t the job of defense attorneys to fill in all the holes, as that burden was on the prosecution. “You understand that if you are left with questions, that is reasonable doubt,” he said. Arthur objected for the prosecution. “He can’t instruct the jury on reasonable doubt, your honor,” he said. “Don’t argue the case,” Webster muttered to Smith, and Smith deferred to the questions Coxwell had asked. I have got to know what Ray Carter thinks about this. Coxwell also questioned Juror No. 27, a white male, about his admission that he read JFP articles. “I’m distrustful of all media,” No. 27 said. Former mayor Dale Danks, who is an attorney for Melton, swept his hand across the 10 members of the media assembled in the balcony. Does "swept his hand" mean that he waived in their general direction?

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T21:35:48-06:00

ID

127378

Comment

I also want to say that I don't want anyone to think that I focused excessively on the JFP. Questions on the JFP really did come at the beginning of Coxwell's questions, and he returned to coverage by the JFP several times. I think that's apparent, Brian. Coxwell is the one who brought it up, for obvious reasons. :-) Shows you how great a job you all are doing.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T21:39:24-06:00

ID

127379

Comment

Thanks, L.W., fixed. Danks' gesture to the media is difficult to describe. It was not, from my perspective, a frustrated or mean gesture. Rather, it seemed like one of those affectionately grouchy swipes attorneys often make at journalists.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-04-23T21:48:03-06:00

ID

127380

Comment

Yeah, they are really scared of the truth.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-04-23T21:48:31-06:00

ID

127381

Comment

Yeah I heard that Danks waved at you specifically Brian. Is that true (I am not saying that it is true) I was just wondering cause I thought that it was pretty funny when I heard about it earlier.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-23T21:53:59-06:00

ID

127382

Comment

How delicious this all is, from a JFP standpoint. OK, all, I think it's time that we all line up and blow the defense attorneys a collective kiss. Hey Danks, Coxwell et al. Thanks for reading, gentlemen. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-04-23T22:03:15-06:00

ID

127383

Comment

Hands waived, birds flipped...what's next? Throwing a brick at ya? :-P

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T22:05:43-06:00

ID

127384

Comment

How's this, Donna? [color=red]XOXOXOXOXO[/color]

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-23T22:11:05-06:00

ID

127385

Comment

Shaun, I'm pretty sure Danks was gesturing to all the media, considering the immediate context.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-04-23T22:17:06-06:00

ID

127386

Comment

Ok I was just wondering, just something that I heard second hand, thats why I asked.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-23T22:20:01-06:00

ID

127387

Comment

Too bad the defense didn't name names! Hahaha...

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-04-24T06:49:05-06:00

ID

127388

Comment

LW lawyers are not allowed to argue the case in voir dire or opening statement but skilled lawyers do it anyway until the prosecution objects and the judge sustains. We're not allowed to define reasonable doubt in Mississippi. However, you can get a jury instruction telling you that lack of evidence, insufficiency of evidence, et al, is reasonable doubt. It's best to not try to define or argue it unless and until the judge approves the jury instruction and you know exactly what you can say and can't.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-24T07:54:54-06:00

ID

127389

Comment

You think that'll stop Danks? He's likely to get tossed anyway for pushing his luck.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-04-24T07:56:18-06:00

ID

127390

Comment

Opening statements were good. I thought Stanley was excellent (by the book). Dank's content was excellent but Graig would have delivered the same quality with a big presence, and with more emotion, passion and outrage. Robert was impermissibly trying to argue the case before the closing, but I don't blame him for trying. Waste of time though. The part of saw of Thompson was ok.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-24T08:47:24-06:00

ID

127391

Comment

Go Danks. Lets put the witness on trial for tax evasion. Real relevant to the case.

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-24T09:13:33-06:00

ID

127392

Comment

ARRRRGH! I've been trying for over an hour to download the video stream. The closest I got was some audio from wlbt.com where I hear every other syllable.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-24T09:20:02-06:00

ID

127393

Comment

LW, what browser are you using? What kind of comp?

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-04-24T09:37:01-06:00

ID

127394

Comment

Stanly is asking all the questions on redirect that I was thinking needed asked. Great job in my humble opinion.

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-24T09:38:23-06:00

ID

127395

Comment

Now wapt.com comes up for me but the audio is still choppy. I'll just let it play for now and hope it improves.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-24T09:39:26-06:00

ID

127396

Comment

LW WLBT comes in and out but has gotten better the longer I leave it going.

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-24T09:47:58-06:00

ID

127397

Comment

it got much better after a few minutes.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-04-24T09:49:12-06:00

ID

127398

Comment

ok! someone update. I don't have access to it right now. What's going on?

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-04-24T10:07:04-06:00

ID

127399

Comment

Jennifer Sutton on stand. Wearing a short sleeved pink blouse, glasses, dark pants. Can't tell if she's had a manicure. Don't know if the attorney questioning her is able to shave.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-04-24T10:11:35-06:00

ID

127400

Comment

Coxwell hitting her for being an absentee landlord. rarely if ever went there, got rent from parents. Asking her if she knew of prior raids at the address. Pretty much trying to establish she was a landlord who neglected her property and tenants.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-04-24T10:22:09-06:00

ID

127401

Comment

Which has absolutely no relevance to the case!

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-24T10:23:45-06:00

ID

127402

Comment

Mom on the stand now. Wearing a dark red blouse, short sleeve, Dark pants. Give a thumbs down for Welch's buddy's outfit. baggy ass jeans, white plain tshirt, Tommy H shirt completely unbuttoned and sleeves rolled up (39 years old. Danks questioning her. Asking her about people he associated with. Admits to being concerned about the company he keeps. On cross now. only asked if her concern is limited to friends that visit. She says yes. steps down.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-04-24T10:30:43-06:00

ID

127403

Comment

LawClerk, I'm pretty sure I'm having trouble because I'm using dial-up. I figured that if I can't see the video well, I could at least hear the audio well enough. It seems like the ISP server is acting up too because sometimes the URL wouldn't even load, and I don't have that problem often. I've alternated between my old IBM PC300PL using WinME and my mom's new Dell on XP. Alternating between Firefox and IE 6.0 doesn't make a difference, and loading it on IE is even slower.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2007-04-24T10:31:08-06:00

ID

127404

Comment

Which has absolutely no relevance to the case! Exactly! It's amazing how the defense makes it seems as if the house itself should be on trial. The house, just like Ms. Sutton and Evans Welch, never got due process. It's all about you, Frank!

Author

golden eagle '97

Date

2007-04-24T10:31:33-06:00

ID

127405

Comment

Dial-up is too slow for streaming video and most audio. LW you will just have to wait for updates. CMDR Funchess of HCSO on the stand now, testifying about eyewitnesses and collected evidence.

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-24T10:39:01-06:00

ID

127406

Comment

WLBT is now showing old footage, not live anymore. I can't get to WAPT Video stream. Figure the odds of that happening!

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-24T10:46:28-06:00

ID

127407

Comment

OK, now I get WAPT, That was strange.

Author

kdbstlrfan1

Date

2007-04-24T10:49:04-06:00

ID

127408

Comment

Deputy Bobby Funchess on the stand discussing the state of the property as he found it and his investigation. Judge so far has seemed pretty fair and straighforward and doesn't put up with any foolishness.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-04-24T10:50:14-06:00

ID

127409

Comment

Stanly is asking all the questions on redirect that I was thinking needed asked. Great job in my humble opinion. I think his best moment his morning is when he turned Danks' attempt to make the first witness look bad because he wasn't a "certified" mechanic back on Danks to show the class differences. That drew the most laughs of the whole morning. He scored on that one with the jury, I suspect.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-04-24T10:56:46-06:00

ID

127410

Comment

I don't see the usual arrogance, confidence or smugness in Frank's demeanor and face. I was watching him as Dank's did the opening, and he had the look of do or say something to show these people I'm innocent or they should let me go. I didn't see the sit back and relax, I got it all in the bag look that he often projects. What's up with that? Pimps scared of court or what? One of my boyhood next door neighbors was a hero to almost all the boys in my neighborhood because of his smoothness with the women, teachers, community leaders and the neighbors. He got in trouble once and I represented him. I allowed him to talk to the judge and expected the same suaveness and great performance. Our neighborhood hero sopke with a broken voice, terrible English and was so incoherent nobody knew what he was talking about. I was disappointed and later told him I was shocked by his poor performance. He weakly said Court is not the place to be f____ing around with ghetto bullcrap. Yet that is exactly what I thought he provided.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-24T11:12:34-06:00

ID

127411

Comment

Ray, I was sitting right above him on the balcony and watched him much of the time. He looked very nervous and impatient much of the time, and watched him hands mostly. Every now and then, he would snicker sarcastically at something somebody said. He is most certainly not relaxed, or exuding arrogance or confidence. I occasionally saw that Melton smugness, though, but not often.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-04-24T11:16:41-06:00