Oregon Standoff Juror Questions Impartiality of Fellow Juror

[Eugene]

Source: Associated Press

Oregon Standoff Juror Questions Impartiality of Fellow Juror

By STEVEN DUBOIS AND GILLIAN FLACCUS, ASSOCIATED PRESS PORTLAND, Ore. — Oct 25, 2016, 8:32 PM ET

Federal prosecutors' case against the armed occupiers of an Oregon wildlife refuge hit a bump Tuesday when a juror raised questions about the impartiality of another person on the panel.

Jurors sent two handwritten notes to the judge that indicated they were having difficulty reaching a consensus after three days of deliberations.

In one note, a member of the panel said a fellow juror mentioned that he was "very biased." The writer asked the judge whether that juror, a former employee of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, can be considered impartial.

The federal agency manages the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in southeastern Oregon that a group led by Ammon Bundy took over for 41 days this winter. During questioning last month ahead of the trial, the juror said he worked for the agency more than 20 years ago as a range tech and firefighter.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/standoff-jurors-difficulty-reaching-consensus-43055833

[mike_c]

1. I wonder whether he is biased against or in favor of the BLM....

If his alleged bias favors federal management, that doesn't bode well for the deliberations, i.e. if the juror who is sympathetic to federal management is the outlier.

[Panich52]

3. My thought also...

[Xipe Totec]

2. Why are we hearing any of this? Jury deliberations are considered secret. nt

[Eugene]

6. Notes from the jury to the judge are not secret.

In my experience, the jury was brought back into open court
and the jurors' questions and concerns were read aloud
along with the judge's response.

[Coyotl]

4. Who isn't?