[speaker001:] well Toby have you ever served on a jury in a criminal trial
[speaker002:] no I've always wanted to and uh but they never uh my name never seems to come up
[speaker001:] well I'm not sure whether you're the lucky one or I am because I have done it and uh
[speaker002:] uh what did you think of the process
[speaker001:] well we had a hung jury so I I came away really disappointed in the process or the least the people involved I was very frustrated about that
[speaker002:] how hung was it I mean what was the vote
[speaker001:] I I think it was something like oh ten to three ten to two or nine to three or something like that
[speaker002:] uh-huh
[speaker001:] which really means that if if we hadn't of had to have unanimous decision we would uh would have completed our mission if you will
[speaker002:] yeah yeah but it's I don't know I I've always thought that the fact the the fact that it has to be unanimous means that there wasn't any doubt in people's minds and if it uh if in like in your case if there's two people who who weren't convinced that the fellow was guilty then or innocent I you didn't say which way it went
[speaker001:] I think it was ten people  no it's the funny
[speaker002:] it can go either way if there's two people that aren't convinced one way or the other then that's um you know I don't I think one one change that might be worthwhile would be to say that you need unanimous verdict to find somebody guilty but but if you don't get a unanimous guilty verdict then they're innocent because the prosecution didn't prove their case to all twelve people
[speaker001:] yeah
[speaker002:] um
[speaker001:] well the the crazy thing about this trial was that the guy said yes I did this I did this armed robbery but he wanted a jury to decide his sentence and we couldn't even agree on a sentence
[speaker002:] huh
[speaker001:] huh I I mean I was ready to put the guy guy away forever but I was dealing with people who said well if it were my son I'd want him to have another chance I know
[speaker002:] that's ridiculous um here in Georgia the only time that the jury gets involved in sentencing at all is in capital punishment cases
[speaker001:] oh is that right otherwise the judge does it
[speaker002:] the judge does all sentencing for everything except capital cases here
[speaker001:] do you think that's appropriate or should it be changed
[speaker002:] I think it is appropriate I think that the judge probably has a much better uh feel for uh what sentences other people who have committed comparable punishment crimes have received and what the guidelines are and uh I I think that by the time you get to that point all the facts have been settled the person's been convicted and the punishment should be well a fairly objective uh thing uh I don't know if there really needs to be all that much discretion in sentencing once you've determined what crime the person is guilty of
[speaker001:] yeah well and I do not know if it is this way it all states or not but in Texas there are severe limitations on what the jury can know know about the the prior history of the alleged criminal
[speaker002:] um-hum
[speaker001:] and also what they can be told about the effects of sentencing Like if you give somebody fifteen years they'll be out in three weeks or something like that I maybe it's not quite that radical but but those things are not those are things are kept from the jury
[speaker002:] yeah here in Georgia when they have the jury involved in sentencing like in a capital case the prosecution is not allowed to say that if you if you give them life he'll be out in seven years that's against the rules
[speaker001:] yeah why
[speaker002:] uh but in with the judge making all the other sentences uh course the judge has open to him all of the previous criminal history uh uh and uh obviously the judge knows what all the guidelines uh or what all the effects can be of parole and things like that
[speaker001:] uh-huh
[speaker002:] um well I think the the the reform of the jury process that I would like most to see is for juries to be required to be informed of their right to judge not only the facts of the case but also the law itself uh juries and lot of people are not aware of this but it is it's part of the common law and it they really is in Georgia it is part of the state Constitution and it is in the Constitution of a lot of states that if the jury uh believes that the law that someone is being tried on is unjust the law itself is unjust the jury can refuse to convict the person uh and this is sort of the people's uh last line of defense against governments
[speaker001:] huh