The drama started with a journal — a yellow, flowered journal — and ended with one of the 12 jurors for the James Botti federal corruption trial dismissed from the case, riding the train home without her shoes.
Judge Charles S. Haight Jr. sent home juror no. eight at about 1:30 p.m. because she brought outside materials — her personal journal — into the deliberation room.
The incident set off a short investigation into the journal and whether the juror was capable of continuing on the case.
But it also exposed concerns the juror was having about the way the deliberations are taking place.
The remaining 11 jurors did not reach a verdict in the case Wednesday. They will return Thursday morning without juror no. eight to continue deliberations.
Botti is accused of bribing Mayor Mark A. Lauretti in exchange for influence getting his development proposal approved.
Lauretti has not been charged and has denied wrongdoing.
The Journaling Juror
The incident started at about 11 a.m., when juror no. eight presented the rest of the jury with two personal journals — one with a butterfly on the cover, the other one with a yellow flowered pattern.
She said she wanted to read some passages concerning the case, but the other jurors stopped her before she could do so, according to the jury foreman, who was questioned about the incident by Judge Haight.
“One of the jurors got up and said ‘Stop right now,’” the jury foreman told Haight.
Upon separate questioning from Judge Haight, juror no. eight presented him with both journals — although one was from the years 2008 and 2009 and didn’t contain any passages about the trial.
The juror did not explicitly describe what she had written, but gave some examples of incidents that concerned her.
In one incident, juror no. eight said another juror continued talking about the case as they walked to the train station after deliberations.
In another incident, juror no. eight said another juror said his mind was made up and that Botti had “hired the best lawyer in New Haven.”
Juror no. eight said she was also prevented from sending the judge a note detailing those and other concerns. She gave Judge Haight that note along with her journals.
Unstable?
After reading the journal and the note, prosecutors questioned the juror’s mental stability.
“You can’t take anything she wrote at face value,” said assistant U.S. attorney Richard Schechter.
He asked Judge Haight to question the rest of the jury “to find out if they’ve been individually tainted by the psychological musings of this juror.”
Judge Haight said the journal itself was “benign” and “non substantive.”
“But the problem arises that she brought it in, and intended to read it — or inflict it upon — the other jurors,” Haight said. “She appears to be a somewhat unstable person who is not conducting herself as a sound deliberating juror should.”
Dow, on the other hand, said the journals didn’t trouble him as much as the note listing her concerns. He asked Judge Haight to question the other jurors about the items listed on the note.
“Being emotional does not equate to being incorrect,” Dow said.
Both the note and the journal entries were entered into the record, but were sealed from the public.
During the proceedings, Dow twice made a motion for a mistrial — once before the journals were read, and once after Haight ruled to dismiss the juror.
Haight denied both motions.
Able to Continue?
After dismissing juror no. eight, Judge Haight brought the remaining jurors into the courtroom and asked them a series of questions about the deliberations, instructing them to raise their hands if the answer was yes at any time.
Has anyone attempted to discuss the case outside the jury room? Has anyone made statements to other jurors about the case outside the jury room?
Has anyone discussed the case before all jurors were present?
No one raised their hands.
Haight then asked the jurors if they felt they could continue on as “an impartial and fair-minded juror.” Individually, each juror said yes.
And The Shoes?
Juror no. eight left for the day at about 1:30, but reappeared at 4:30 p.m. in the form of a telephone message left with the court clerk.
In it, she said she had left her extra pair of shoes in the jury deliberation room and also questioned how a reporter knew her name when he approached her on the street afterward. (The woman referred to her own name during her interview with Haight.)
The juror also asked to be able to talk to Judge Haight about the incident.
Haight said her shoes would be returned, but said any contact with her while the deliberations were still underway would be “inappropriate.”
