I'm sure everyone involved in that trial is relieved it's over. The trial, of course, was State vs. Pickard which ended yesterday with the jury finding the defendant not guilty. I attended as an observer with the intent of writing about it, and you can read the daily summaries here.
I had heard somewhere that arson cases are supposed to be difficult because there are so many elements to prove -- the prosecution has to prove not only that the fire was caused by arson but that the defendant caused it intentionally. So this case became interesting as soon as the indictments were made public.
The case didn't really proceed the way I expected. Fire investigators look at various things to tell them whether a fire is intentionally set, and I was expecting there to be some doubt as to whether it was, in fact, arson. However, the defense stipulated in its opening statement that it was arson. And evidence that gasoline soaked rags had been left throughout the house left no doubt about it.
So the case became much more human. Did that particular defendant cause that particular fire?
The indictment was obtained almost three years ago by a prosecutor who is no longer with the Midland County District Attorney's office. And, by the way, the person who was District Attorney back then is no longer there either, so a new set of people inherited this case. There were probably meetings in the incoming DA's office to decide whether to proceed or dismiss. But the fire was definitely arson, and while there was no "bloody glove," there were several things that made the defendant look suspicious. So at some point a decision must have been made to go forward with the case.
Looked at one way, the evidence suggests the defendant was guilty. But looked at another way it could all be coincidental. For each of those things that made the defendant look suspicious there was a reasonable explanation. And ultimately the jury had to decide whether all of those suspicious elements when looked at as a whole indicated guilt, or whether the defendant simply through bad luck, coincidence and timing had all of these things happen that merely made an innocent person look guilty. The jury must have decided that there was not enough evidence to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and they found him not guilty. That's the way our criminal justice system works.
So there I was on day one with my notebook, watching and writing, trying to look inconspicuous. I stayed all day and showed up again the next day, so it didn't take long for people to get curious about why I was there. And when they found out they were probably a little bit apprehensive about the idea of a blogger listening and planning to write about what they said. It would have been easier to wait until it was over and write about it in story form. But I started the first day writing a chronology of the day's events, and so I continued in that fashion throughout the trial. And when the people in the courtroom realized that I didn't have an iron in the fire, so to speak, we all got along very well.
On the last day after both sides rested the case went to the jury, and the Bailiff, Ronnie Beardon, kept very close tabs on them. They all had to stay together, so when someone wanted a smoke break all 12 went outside. They could talk about the case only when the group was together. They couldn't make or receive any phone calls, and Mr. Beardon dutifully placed several calls to jurors' family members and business associates with instructions and messages. And Mr. Beardon cheerfully relayed any return messages, although he did decline to deliver a kiss.
If a jury doesn't reach a verdict then they get sequestered overnight at the nearby Hilton. They get an entire floor to themselves so that there is no possibility of outside interference. There can be no tvs, radios or working telephones. They can communicate with no one, and sheriff's deputies stand guard in the hall at night. But that wasn't necessary this time.
The jury came back after seven hours of deliberation with a verdict: Not guilty. The defendant's wife let out a gasp that can only be described as the sound of relief. Eight grueling days of trial, and it was over.
There's still a civil case pending in which Mr. Pickard is suing his insurance company for payment on his claim for the loss of the house and contents. And each day of testimony a lawyer from the firm representing the insurance company was in there taking notes. But that trial is in the future. And it's only about money. This was the big one.
Comments