On February 14, for the second time, there was a hung jury in convicted molestor Steve Boudreaux's case. In the first trial Boudreaux was convicted of Count 6.
Court minutes from 2/14 were still not entered in e court as of 2/21. There was a trial setting on 2/21 which was continued to 2/26.
On the 21st, I got this email. In my previous coverage, I mentioned juror #6. You can read court minutes about juror #6 which are in a previous post. While I know the name, the gender and other information, the juror provided to me, I will be keeping that information confidential.
"Hi John,
I was one of the jurors on the recent People vs Steve Boudreaux case. I found your blog following that case where I saw your previous coverage of the case from 2024. I’d like to share my thoughts on the case as a previous juror did."
"The jury was deadlocked on five counts 11-1 and one count 9-3. The bigger number in both was for guilty."
Going into the courtroom, I personally had a number of doubts regarding the charges. I thought if someone had asked me right away what my decision was I would have had to say not guilty. After less than a day of deliberation and readback of testimony, I changed my mind on all counts, except for the count as it pertained to things occurring at The Arcata House. On the second day of deliberation, a note was sent to the judge regarding another juror that we believed was not following the law as given to us by the judge. This juror refused to reread court instructions when asked by other jurors. They refused to accept the stipulation regarding Mr. Boudreaux's former conviction regarding JD2. Beyond that they stipulated about many things not included in evidence and did not listen to the other jurors when we told him he was doing that.
Following the note, some jurors were questioned and in the end we went back to deliberation with the original group of 12 jurors. After another full day of deliberation, we went to the judge to tell her that we did not believe we would be able to come to a decision. I am deeply saddened that this was the end result, especially after finding out that this was a retrial. I firmly believe that this juror should have been removed from the jury, not because he disagreed with me (because we actually agreed on many points) but because of his refusal to follow the laws given to us. I understand that in a case like this, removing a juror could be a way to stack the jury and come back with a guilty verdict but that was not the case, I was simply saddened by someone who was unable to follow the rules given to us. "
Previous posts:
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2025/02/for-second-time-hung-jury-in-convicted.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2025/02/right-before-deliberations-defense.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2025/02/jane-doe-1-is-peoples-first-witness-in.html?m=1
**This previous post has links to all other coverage on the Boudreaux case including the first trial**
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.