#1 State of FL v Terry Trussell - 060616 AM Session 1
In Chambers - Thank you Reality Check (RC)!
00:00:40 Judge H. wants to know how long each side needs for voir dire. SA 30 minutes, IG wants 2-3 hours JH says 1 hour.
00:01:55 JH believes he should tell the jury about why the out of district judge and SA are on the case. Wants to explain there is a conflict since Siegmeister and judges may be called as witnesses. IG wants him to say nothing. SA OK with explanation. JH says he will tell the jury.
00:13:40 Pending defense motions discussed. Change of venue, allowed defenses, etc. All of them either denied or deferred.
00:20:05 IG asks how JH handles objections. JH - one or two words only. All discussion at sidebar if needed. Don't abuse.
00:22:55 SA Meggs asks about electronic court recordings being available. JH says he agreed to make them available instead of allowing Jason Hoyt to record. He thought it might be a distraction to have Hoyt recording.
00:23:45 Discussion about juror striking and seating process.
00:27:15 IG wants to have a monitor set up to show jury exhibits as she presents. JH says he would have to see it to rule.
#2 State of FL v Terry Trussell - 060616 AM Session 2
Judge Voir Dire: 00:01:00 - 01:17:00
State VD: 01:21:00 - 01:30:00
IG VD: 01:31:35 - 01:51:00
IG: 02:19:50 - 02:32:45
Jury seated & sworn: 02:33:15
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMLR1eEo3IMNotes from Paul Lentz:
1. From Day 1, #2 (jury selection)
At the beginning, we see the person acting as court clerk that day. She is wearing a light turquoise top and dark slacks. She has dark hair which is pulled back into a bun or short pony tail.
26:45, during general (group) voir dire, Judge Hankinson indicates that the attorneys will read a list of their witnesses. The lawyers do so.
30:45, following that reading, Judge Hankinson asks, "Does anyone know any of those persons personally?"
31:46, after one of the potential jurors has acknowledged "knowing" some of the witnesses, Judge Hankinson (in individual questioning) asks that potential juror (not Cannon), "If those people were witnesses, anything about that you know them would make it difficult for you to consider their testimony like you would anyone else's?" [Okay, it's not grammatical, but Hankinson's point is clear]
--In other instances following this, where another potential juror has indicated that they "know" one or more of the potential witnesses, Judge Hankinson's follow-up query is not identical to the query at 31:46, but is similar enough to amount to a uniform inquiry. This is important--this consistency in Judge Hankinson's follow-up question with each individual potential juror, and that follow-up question's general consistency. Not surprisingly, it's a point not acknowledged by the defense in their contempt motion..
--As noted before, potential juror Cannon does not raise his hand in acknowledgement of "knowing" anyone on the witness lists of either the State or the defense.
In terms of providing individual information about himself during voir dire:
57:00 Potential juror Cannon has lived in Dixie County for 47 years (which would be all his life, although he does not say that). He is married to (but separated from for "three or four years" from Mary Cannon, who works in the [3rd Circuit] State Attorney's office; they have two sons, one 23 and one who is 16.
#3 State of FL v Terry Trussell - 060616 PM Session 1
Witness sequestration ruleNotes from Paul Lentz:
Moving on to Day 1, #3 (State witnesses)
At the beginning of this video, again, the person in the "Madam Clerk" position in the courtroom is dressed in a light turquoise top and dark slacks, with dark hair pulled back.
43:45 SA Meggs calls Dana Johnson as a witness (and the court goes to sidebar)
45:36 Dana Johnson enters the court and is sworn in (by the Deputy Clerk wearing the turquoise top). Dana Johnson is wearing dark slacks and a figural printed blouse, and has her shoulder-length hair down.
Not the same person. So, it is obvious that Dana Johnson was not present in the court during the jury selection, and--since we first see Dana Johnson as a witness before the selected jury--it is also obvious that Dana Johnson would have first seen juror (and first cousin) Tim Cannon as an already-empaneled and sworn in juror. I suppose that it is possible that Dana Johnson might have followed the progress of the jury selection via live feed back in the innards of the courthouse, but maybe not. I would still submit that, the moment she realized that her first cousin (juror Cannon) was on the jury, she had an obligation to disclose the relationship at her first opportunity...and maybe she did.
Or, another possible explanation for potential juror Cannon's failure to acknowledge up front his familial relationship with Dana Johnson might well have been because, while factually first cousins, their realistic relationship (for whatever reason) is not one in which either could say that they "know" one another in the literal sense of the word (not "know of," and not "know who they are;" that's not what Judge Hankinson asked). Just as I have a first cousin a few years older than I, who probably lives here in Orlando...I don't "know" him.
Or here's another possibility: Our BOTGs for the trial both remarked (and they were referring to juror Cannon) that he seemed 'out of it' and maybe 'asleep' during their observations of him on the first day of trial (albeit more alert--and cleaner--on the second day). And maybe he was dozing or wool-gathering when Judge Hankinson asked, "Do you know?..." and when the lists of potential witnesses were read by SA Meggs and Inger Garcia.
IG makes a request for constitution expert to stay in court- denied
IG tries to bring up her previously denied motions - still denied
Jury Instructions: 00:03:00 - 00:19:00
State opening statement: 00:19:40 - 00:43:00
IG reserves opening statement
Dana Johnson - County Clerk:
Direct: 00:46:00 - 01:02:37
IG objects to State's Ex 1 & 2
IG requests to delay cross
Cross: 01:21:00 - 03:21:45
Redirect: 03:22:40 - 03:31:00
No jury questions