The Editor
Los Angeles Times
by e-mail: letters@latimes.com

To the Editor:

Barry Siegel did a good job of reporting the conflict between Laura Kriho and the courthouse gang of Gilpin County, Colorado (\\\"Holdout Juror Accused of Criminal Contempt\\\", Tuesday, Feb. 4, 1997). However, he misunderstands some important points.

First, in order for any organization to be successful, it must identify its purpose. Seneca put it this way: \\\"To a pilot who does not know to which port he sails, no wind is favorable.\\\"

The purpose of the jury is a well guarded (or well neglected) secret. It\\\'s not taught in law schools, and it\\\'s not given in jury instructions. That\\\'s because it\\\'s purpose is downright seditious.

The Supreme Court very clearly identified the purpose of the jury in Duncan v. Louisiana (1968): \\\"...to prevent oppression by the government.\\\" Seven years later, in Taylor v. Louisiana, they elaborated on the subject: \\\"The purpose of the jury is to guard against the exercise of arbitrary powers....\\\"

In order to fulfill its purpose, the jury must have the power to nullify bad or misapplied law. It should also be alert to sniff out government misconduct in the prosecution of a case.

Most importantly, Mr. Siegel repeats that old canard of the Controlitarians who would further eviscerate the jury system: \\\"Southern white \\\'jury nullifiers\\\' have acquitted more than a few racist killers over the years.\\\" This is a complete misstatement of the truth.

Every miscarriage of justice in criminal or civil trials is blamed on the jury. But the real culprit is the government.

When the Framers of the (Federal) Constitution guaranteed us the right to trial by jury, they were careful to say \\\"an impartial jury.\\\" That means a jury whose members are impartially selected.

In Mississippi, where the percentage of blacks is around 35% of the population, it is impossible that an \\\"impartial jury\\\" could result in an all-white jury.

Thus, if an \\\"all-white jury\\\" has been impaneled, it has been tampered with by the government . There may be 12 people sitting in the jury box, but they\\\'re not an impartial jury.

Perhaps we need a new word for such an assemblage. Let\\\'s use \\\"Juroid.\\\" We could define it as \\\"1. Something resembling a jury, 2. An excuse for a jury, 3. A government-issued jury, 4. A jury which has been tampered with.\\\"

How is the jury tampered with?

The jury is tampered with when certain groups are ingeniously excluded from the jury pool and when \\\"troublesome\\\" jurors are eliminated during voir dire. \\\"Voir dire\\\" is the process during which intrusive, irrelevant questions are asked of jurors so that each side can attempt to stack the jury to its advantage. As Mr. Siegel eloquently stated, \\\"Lawyers and judges use voir dire to weed out not only biased jurors but also those distinctly rich with conviction, knowledge, education and will.\\\"

Then, in the judge\\\'s instructions, the jury is mislead as to their power and purpose. They are never told their true purpose. And they are nearly always told that they must apply the law, whether they like it or not.

Abraham Lincoln had a favorite riddle: \\\"How many legs does a lamb have, if you count the tail as a leg?\\\"

His answer: \\\"Four. Counting a tail as a leg doesn\\\'t make it a leg.\\\"

It\\\'s the same with the jury. The mere fact that twelve people are sitting in the jury box does not mean that they are the \\\"impartial jury\\\" we are guaranteed by the Constitution.

The Fully Informed Jury Association maintains a web page which provides accurate information about the jury: http://www.fija.org and a toll-free number through which callers can get a free information package: (800) 835-JURY.

Harvey Wysong
National Spokesman
701 Longleaf Drive
Atlanta, Georgia 30342
(404) 266-0930
hwysong@mindspring.com