Just like baking a cake
July 31st, 2007, 8:15 pm · 2 Comments · posted by Aaron
Before jurors heard closing arguments in the trial of Robert Harrison, a Newberry Springs man charged with kidnapping and raping a 9-year-old girl, they sat through an hour and a half monologue from Judge Jules Fleuret — jury instructions.
The jury instructions instruct, duh, jurors how to weigh evidence, apply it to specific facets of charges and reach a verdict. Simple, right. Wrong. During his closing argument, defense attorney Michael Duncan apologized to the jury for the complexity of the instructions. He said the state legislature’s need to re-write them every two years has muddled them into an indecipherable mess.
Consider this suggestion from the jury instructions:
“The testimony of only one witness can prove a fact. Before deciding whether a witness testimony proves a fact, please consider all the evidence in the case.” Huh?
Judges and lawyers spent years in law school and hours behind books studying the law and how to use it. Then, they throw it at a group of average citizens — a jury of the defendant’s peers. To help the jury wrap their minds around this legal nonsense, both Fleuret and deputy defense attorney Kay Neshat employed some clever analogies.
Fleuret on the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence:
If a witness says they saw it was raining outside, that is direct evidence that it is raining outside. If a witness says that they saw someone come inside wearing a rain coat with drops of water on it, that is only circumstantial evidence that it is raining outside.
Neshat on considering charged crimes and lesser and included crimes. (Note: In Harrison’s case, he faces eight charged crimes, each with a handful of lesser and included crimes the jury could convict him of instead of the charged crime.)
You could eat eggs, sugar, flour, milk, each on their own, but if you throw them together, they could make some sort of cake or pancake batter. The charged crime is the final product. The lesser and included crimes are analogous to the ingredients.
Now you’re a legal expert.
— Aaron Aupperlee | Staff writer












August 2nd, 2007 at 7:32 pm
I don’t really care how it was all explained. That girl is my Grandaughter and Harrison got what he deserved and if he didn’t he will when he is introduced to the general prison population.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:49 pm
By the way Aaron I think you are one AWESOME reporter and I enjoy your articles. I will continue to check the dispatch and read them even though I don’t live there.
I am going off line now so my feet remain on the ground rather than elsewhere. For the first time in a couple of weeks I think I will get a good nights sleep.