2.Individual Voir Dire — Hardship, Impartiality, and Death-Penalty Views (Part 1)
403 linesTHE COURT: All right. Starting with Number 366.
COURT CLERK: I remind counsel and everybody to speak into the mics, remember?
Juror No. 366.
JAMES MCALEAR: Juror 366.
(The juror enters the courtroom.)
COURT CLERK: Sir, over here, if you would. Have a seat right here.
And if you could do me a favor, keep your voice up and speak into the mic so everyone around the table can hear you, okay?
JUROR: Okay.
THE COURT: You can adjust that and make it comfortable for yourself.
Good morning.
JUROR: Good morning.
THE COURT: Since you were here last to fill out the questionnaire, have you been able to follow the instructions to avoid discussing the case with anyone in substance?
JUROR: In substance, yes, sir.
THE COURT: And also, as much as possible, to avoid any media accounts of the case?
JUROR: If I hear it, I turn it off.
THE COURT: Thank you. So we're going to follow up -- that's the questionnaire you filled out. We're going to follow up on some of the things you told us about.
You work as a food service supervisor in a nursing facility?
JUROR: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And you've been there, I guess, quite a while?
JUROR: Yes, sir. We just were sold this past July from Kindred to a new company, Chestnut. So it's actually like starting from day one.
THE COURT: In what sense? New routine?
JUROR: I lost all my time. I lost my 25 years.
THE COURT: Really?
JUROR: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Well, are you a salaried employee?
JUROR: No, sir. I'm hourly.
THE COURT: So if you had to serve two, three, four months on this case, that would cost you your hourly wages?
JUROR: I would not get paid, sir. I have no vacation time. I have no holiday time. I have not earned anything till July 1st.
THE COURT: Okay. I think that's all we need to know. Thank you.
COURT CLERK: Just leave that right here and I'll take care of it.
(The juror is excused.)
[REDACTED]
MR. WEINREB: I don't think so.
THE COURT: I think it's reported.
MR. WEINREB: Yes.
COURT CLERK: Juror No. 369.
COURT CLERK: Juror 369.
(The juror enters the courtroom.)
COURT CLERK: Sir, over here, please. Have a seat, if you would.
Do me a favor, keep your voice up and speak into the mic so everyone around here can hear you.
JUROR: All right.
THE COURT: Good morning.
JUROR: Good morning.
THE COURT: Have you been able, since you were last here, to avoid discussion of the case in substance with anyone?
JUROR: Yup.
THE COURT: And as much as possible, to avoid seeing media reports about the case?
JUROR: Yup.
THE COURT: Okay. So that's the questionnaire you filled out. We're going to follow up on some of the things you told us about.
I would like you to look at page 5. Your answer -- what we have is Question 10, which is about the schedule in the case and the length of the case and so on, and you told us you're self-employed and would like to discuss with your family and business partner whether you would be able to serve on a three- to four-month case.
Have you had those discussions?
JUROR: Yeah.
THE COURT: And what do you think?
JUROR: I mean, yeah, it's -- definitely it will crush my business, no question about it, you know.
THE COURT: Tell me about the business. Is it a two-person operation?
JUROR: Yeah, I have a partner. We do hardwood floors. And, you know, we pretty much just got our feet on the ground within the last couple of years. So, yeah, it will be crushing financially but...
THE COURT: Well, we certainly don't want you to be crushed financially. Let me just ask you about it. How is your compensation figured? Do you --
JUROR: It's half and half.
THE COURT: Of what the joint enterprise does, is that it?
JUROR: Yeah, pretty much.
THE COURT: Is it possible for the work to go on with your partner supervising it? You have people that work for you?
JUROR: On occasion, yeah. We have a guy that helps us, yeah.
THE COURT: Here's what I'm getting at. If other people were able to do the work so the business kept getting the money, would you still be able to split it with your partner and you yourself get the money?
JUROR: Yeah.
THE COURT: Or some -- or alternatively, is some of your compensation based on your own time that you put in, like an hourly rate or something like that?
JUROR: Well, there's just like certain things that I can do and he can't and vice versa, so you know.
THE COURT: You mean technically?
JUROR: Technically, yeah. There's certain, like, customer-relation stuff that is not really his strong suit.
THE COURT: I see.
JUROR: And stuff like that.
THE COURT: Well, would you be able, after hours and on Fridays and weekends, to attend to those kinds of things?
JUROR: I mean, I could hopefully. But even like -- I had something to do today. I didn't know I was supposed to be here until last night, and then I had to cancel. So stuff like that is a pain in the neck, but...
THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thanks.
JUROR: All right?
(The juror exits the courtroom.)
COURT CLERK: Juror No. 370.
COURT CLERK: Juror 370.
(The juror enters the courtroom.)
COURT CLERK: Ma'am, over here, if you would, please. Over here. Thanks. Have a seat.
If you could do me a favor, keep your voice up and speak into the mic so everyone around the table can hear you. The mics are adjustable, so adjust it to your comfort.
THE COURT: Good morning.
JUROR: Good morning.
THE COURT: Since you were last here have you been able to avoid discussion of the case with anyone as I had asked you to?
JUROR: I'm trying to.
THE COURT: And succeeding --
JUROR: Yeah.
THE COURT: -- by and large?
JUROR: By and large.
THE COURT: And avoiding any media about it?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: So that's the questionnaire you filled out in front of you. We're going to ask you some follow-up questions about the information you put in.
Let me start with what you do for employment.
JUROR: What page?
THE COURT: This is page 10. Tell us about your employment.
JUROR: What's that?
THE COURT: Tell us about your employment.
JUROR: I work at an assisted-living facility with the elderly.
THE COURT: And what do you do?
JUROR: Serve the meals, do activity with them.
THE COURT: Is this a full-time job?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: And you've been doing it for, it looks like, about five years or so?
JUROR: Five years, yeah.
THE COURT: If you'd flip back to page 5, we asked you there whether the schedule of the case, including the likely duration of it, several months, would present a significant hardship to you, and you said no.
JUROR: Well, I'm not sure. Does your employer pay you? I couldn't not get paid for four months.
THE COURT: I guess that's the question we ask you. What would the employer do?
JUROR: Yeah, I don't know. I didn't --
THE COURT: Are you -- are you salaried or do you get paid an hourly --
JUROR: Hourly.
THE COURT: And you haven't discussed with the employer whether you would get paid if you were here?
JUROR: No. I just actually thought you did. I thought it was --
THE COURT: Oh, I see. Okay. No, it's not necessarily required for employers to do that.
How big is the facility?
JUROR: It has places all over the country. It's a big corporation.
THE COURT: But, I mean, is it something you submit time sheets for on a weekly basis or do you just have regular hours and you get --
JUROR: I have regular hours. Regular.
THE COURT: So you don't keep time; they just assume you've worked whatever the number of hours required is?
JUROR: Yeah.
THE COURT: Okay. I'm not sure you'd be able to handle it, so, financially.
JUROR: Okay.
THE COURT: So thanks.
(The juror exits the courtroom.)
COURT CLERK: Juror No. 375.
COURT CLERK: Juror 375.
(The juror enters the courtroom.)
COURT CLERK: Sir, over here, if you would. Have a seat.
Do me a favor, keep your voice up, speak into the mic so everyone around here can hear you.
JUROR: Okay.
COURT CLERK: This is adjustable.
THE COURT: You don't have to get that close.
JUROR: Okay.
THE COURT: Good morning.
JUROR: Good morning.
THE COURT: Since you were here last have you been able to avoid any discussion of the substance of the case?
JUROR: Absolutely.
THE COURT: And also as much as possible avoid any media reports about the case?
JUROR: Yes, indeed.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Tell us about your employment.
JUROR: I work at a local college, Suffolk University, over near the Statehouse.
THE COURT: What do you do?
JUROR: I'm an academic advisor there.
THE COURT: Tell me a little more.
JUROR: I work with students. I help them to stay on track with their studies, advance toward their degree goals in an efficient manner, some academic support counseling as well.
THE COURT: Are there other people who do the same thing?
JUROR: Yes; I'm in a large office.
THE COURT: How many of you are there?
JUROR: I think 11 at the moment.
THE COURT: And how long have you been doing it?
JUROR: I've been doing that particular job for about two years now.
THE COURT: And this is the undergraduate school --
JUROR: That's correct.
THE COURT: -- or both?
JUROR: No, I primarily work with undergraduates.
THE COURT: In your questionnaire you -- if you look at page 5, Question 10, this was -- we set out the schedule in the case, including the possibility it would last for several months, and you wrote, "It would be no unusual hardship but uncertain if I can still get paid by the employer."
Have you had any discussions about that?
JUROR: You know, it's been so busy I haven't really followed up with my human resources department.
THE COURT: Are you a salaried employee?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: We asked people about their social media use.
JUROR: Sure.
THE COURT: You say you use Facebook and Instagram but very infrequently. Is that a --
JUROR: That's correct.
THE COURT: Do you use any of those in your work or is this just social?
JUROR: Just social.
THE COURT: Do you typically both post and view other posts, or do you look at what other people have put up?
JUROR: It's very rare for me to post. I occasionally will put vacation pictures on, things like that.
THE COURT: Some of the -- I'm just looking at page 17, Question 58. Some of the students you counsel are international students?
JUROR: Yes, we have a large international population.
THE COURT: And from all over?
JUROR: All over.
THE COURT: If you turn to the next page, 66 -- 65 and 66 -- I guess 65 is the better one -- there are some regions there that are identified. Do you know if you have any students from those areas?
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Any advisees, I guess is the way I should put it?
JUROR: Well, I can say that I have worked recently with a student from Russia.
THE COURT: Whereabouts, do you know? From where in Russia?
JUROR: To be honest, I don't really know. It just wasn't pertinent to the conversation.
THE COURT: Fine.
Let me ask you to turn to page 20 and Question 77. In this question we asked whether as a result of things you'd seen or read in the news or otherwise had you formed an opinion about whether the defendant was guilty or not, and if so, whether he should receive the death penalty or not. And it appears that you may -- your original answer to A and B and then changed it and so --
JUROR: Yeah, it's a little scribbled.
THE COURT: So you had, I guess, selected "yes" as your answer to question Part A, and "no" to Part B, although initially you thought maybe you would say you were unsure?
JUROR: That's correct.
THE COURT: Okay. And then you said you were unsure as to the other penalty questions?
JUROR: Uh-huh.
THE COURT: Below that we asked if you answered yes to any of these questions, would you be able or unable to set aside your opinion and base your decision on the evidence presented to you at court rather than things you'd seen before the trial, and you checked the box "able."
JUROR: That's correct.
THE COURT: You think even if you have an opinion at this point, you could set it aside and make a decision only based only on the evidence at trial?
JUROR: To be honest, your Honor, there wasn't an "unsure" policy, so I think on that day I was leaning more towards "able," but I think it would be, really, "unsure."
THE COURT: So you understand, I'm sure, that in our criminal justice system a person is accused of a crime, is presumed to be innocent of that crime, unless and until the government proves that he's guilty --
JUROR: Absolutely.
THE COURT: -- by the evidence at trial.
The government's burden is to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt by the evidence.
JUROR: Certainly.
THE COURT: So we ask jurors to put their mind in the condition where they will listen to the evidence -- all the evidence produced, and at the end decide whether the government has met its burden to prove the defendant guilty of the charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, putting aside, of course, things that are extraneous to the body of evidence.
Do you think if you were a juror in this case you would be able to do that?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: I think -- okay. I'll just leave it at that.
We asked in Question 81 on the next page if you or someone close to you had been personally affected by the events of the week of April 15th, and you said you didn't quite understand the question.
JUROR: Sure.
THE COURT: It was intended to be a very general question. So if you thought you had detected any effect, that you tell us about it.
JUROR: Yeah. No, the reason that I answered that was based on my instructions that day from the jury administrator. I have a friend who works right near there. He's a dentist, locally. And I know he was affected by it. He was worried about it. But he wasn't personally injured. I didn't know anyone who was directly injured by it.
But, you know, sure, I know a lot of people who were affected by it. I think everyone who lives -- I think everyone in the country was affected by it in some way. So that's why I had difficulty expanding on that answer. I hope that makes sense.
THE COURT: That's fine. I mean, that's the kind of thing we were looking for.
Were you in Boston on the 19th, the Friday of that week? What I'm getting at is did you have to remain behind -- within the building and so on?
JUROR: No. No, I was not at work that day.
THE COURT: You were home?
JUROR: Yeah.
THE COURT: And you did not have to shelter in place, then?
JUROR: No, I did not.
THE COURT: Let's go to page 23 and Question 88. Beginning with Question 88, we asked a series of questions to try to understand whether the prospective jurors had views about the death penalty and what they were. And in 88 we asked for a general view. If you have any views on the death penalty in general, what are they, and you said, "I'm not against the death penalty but not for it either, case by case."
JUROR: That's right.
THE COURT: And the next question we asked if you could place yourself on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 was someone strongly opposed, to believe the death penalty should never be imposed, and 10 was someone strongly in favor who believe it should be imposed whenever a defendant had been convicted of intentional murder.
You put yourself at 5?
JUROR: That's right.
THE COURT: I guess that's consistent with 88? Was that --
JUROR: Yeah, I think it's -- if you want me to expound.
THE COURT: Yeah, go ahead.
JUROR: I think it's something that really does need to be looked at seriously in a case by case. I don't think it's ever a deterrent, but I think it has the potential to provide justice for the victims if, you know, that's what comes out in the trial.
THE COURT: Okay. If you go to the next page, Question 90, rather than having you put yourself on a numerical scale, we asked you to look at a series of formulations and see if there was one that came close to representing -- or did represent your view, and you circled E, said, "I'm in favor of the death penalty but I could vote for a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of release if I believed that sentence was called for by the facts and the law in the case."
JUROR: That's correct.
THE COURT: And so you would reserve judgment, is that it, until you heard in a particular case all the circumstances?
JUROR: I believe so, yes.
THE COURT: You heard me describe the penalty phase this morning, whether it be evidence presumably from the government about things that made -- that aggravated the offense, made it particularly serious.
JUROR: That's right.
THE COURT: And there would be evidence from the defense of things that mitigated the offense, or mitigated the penalty that you might think was appropriate. You'd be able to consider all those things and make a judgment based on your analysis of those things?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: In the next -- on the next page, Question 95 at the bottom, we asked particularly about this case. If you found this defendant guilty and you decided that the death penalty was an appropriate punishment for him, could you conscientiously vote for the death penalty, and you said "yes."
JUROR: Absolutely.
THE COURT: And the top of the next page is a related question. If you found him guilty and you decided life in prison without the possibility of release was the appropriate punishment, could you conscientiously vote for life imprisonment without the possibility of release, and you said "yes" there as well?
JUROR: Yes, indeed.
THE COURT: Any follow-up?
MR. WEINREB: Good morning, sir.
JUROR: Good morning.
MR. WEINREB: I have no questions, but thank you.
MS. CONRAD: Good morning, sir. My name is Miriam Conrad. I've one of the lawyers for Mr. Tsarnaev.
I'd like to go back to the -- Question 81 about whether anyone you know was affected by the bombings or their aftermath.
JUROR: Okay. Let me get to that.
THE COURT: It's page 21.
JUROR: Thank you.
MS. CONRAD: Sorry. Thank you.
And you told Judge O'Toole about a few people you knew who were present. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?
JUROR: Well, were they -- no, they weren't present, but they were affected by it. They had to evacuate, and they had to keep away from that area of the city for some time.
MS. CONRAD: And so those are people you know who live or work --
JUROR: They work nearby that area.
MS. CONRAD: When you say "that area," you mean --
JUROR: On Boylston Street.
MS. CONRAD: -- on Boylston Street?
Did they hear or see anything that day?
JUROR: To my knowledge, no. Thankfully, they weren't there.
MS. CONRAD: And when the bombings happened, where were you?
JUROR: I was at home.
MS. CONRAD: And did you have concerns about the people you knew in the area?
JUROR: I did. And I actually gave them a call, and I found that they weren't in the office on that day, thankfully. So everyone was safe.
MS. CONRAD: Okay. And how long did it take before you found out that everyone was safe?
JUROR: Not long. About 10, 15 minutes or so. Again, the reason I put "I don't understand" is the nature of the word "affected."
MS. CONRAD: Oh, sure. I understand. I'm just trying to find out a little bit more about that.
JUROR: Sure.
MS. CONRAD: And you said, you know, that you felt that everyone in Boston -- I think you said everyone in the country was affected in some way.
JUROR: Absolutely.
MS. CONRAD: Can you tell us how you were affected by those events?
MR. WEINREB: Objection.
THE COURT: Yeah, I don't think the question was asking for what he thinks about the events, if that's --
MS. CONRAD: That's not what I asked.
THE COURT: I know. But I think he's already told us -- it didn't have any direct personal effect.
JUROR: No.
THE COURT: Yeah. I think that's it.
MS. CONRAD: When you said you think everyone in the country was affected, can you tell us what you meant by that?
MR. WEINREB: Objection.
THE COURT: Yeah. You don't have to answer it.
MS. CONRAD: You said that -- if I could turn to Question 20 -- excuse me -- Question 77 on page 20.
JUROR: Okay.
MS. CONRAD: It looks like you gave this some thought, which is a good thing. As the judge said, we want people to tell us how they feel about these questions. But it also looks like you changed your response from "unsure" to "yes" on guilt.
As you sit here today, what do you think is the accurate answer to that question?
JUROR: "Yes."
MS. CONRAD: It's still "yes"?
JUROR: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: And can you tell us why you initially put down "unsure"?
JUROR: I was thinking about the circumstances of the case that I knew, and I was also writing on my lap, so it got a little bit jumbled in there. But, no, I firmly believe A would be "yes."
MS. CONRAD: Okay. And is the same thing true about your response on B, about whether he's not guilty?
JUROR: Yes, that's correct.
MS. CONRAD: So you said that with respect to 77 as far as whether you'd be able to put that aside, that you would -- a more accurate answer would be "unsure." I'm sorry. Did I misunderstand that?
JUROR: Forgive me. I'm not sure I'm following you.
MS. CONRAD: All right. So if you would go to the bottom of 77, to that question, it asks whether you would be able to set aside your opinion, and I thought you explained to the judge that --
JUROR: Yeah. No, I don't think I understood the way this question was framed. I apologize. What I meant to say by that is that I would have to -- it's a case-by-case basis, my feelings on the death penalty.
MS. CONRAD: Okay. But this is -- if I could just ask you to take a look at that. It's a different question.
JUROR: That he should not receive?
THE COURT: I don't think that's what she's asking.
MS. CONRAD: No, no, no, the bottom part that starts, "If you answered yes."
THE COURT: Where you said you would be able to decide on the evidence.
JUROR: Okay.
I don't think I understood that question. I apologize. I stand by the statement that I told you today.
MS. CONRAD: But you had said that if the one option had been "unsure," you would have selected that. So I just wanted to understand what you meant by that.
JUROR: Okay.
I'm a little bit confused.
THE COURT: Okay.
JUROR: I'm sorry.
MS. CONRAD: Maybe I misunderstood myself. Maybe I misheard.
I thought when the judge asked you about this part of the question --
MR. WEINREB: Your Honor, I object at this point, and I would request that the question be open-ended rather than trying to create what he said and --
MS. CONRAD: It was going to be open-ended. It was going to be open-ended.
MR. WEINREB: Yes, but it sounds like the premise of the question is that he said something that he does not remember saying.
THE COURT: Let me ask you to take your time and read that "If you answered yes" paragraph -- yes, right there -- and tell us what today you think your answer to that question would be.
(Pause.)
JUROR: Okay. Then I think yes, I could set that aside.
MS. CONRAD: And you're confident about that?
JUROR: Yes. Sorry for the mixup.
MS. CONRAD: On Question 90 on page 24 you selected the response E which indicates you're in favor of the death penalty, correct?
JUROR: You know what? That was the closest I thought to, you know, my true feelings on the subject.
MS. CONRAD: Sure. And that's all we're trying to find out, is your true feelings.
So would you say you lean slightly more toward the death penalty?
JUROR: Possibly.
MS. CONRAD: And you said that -- in response to Question 93 on page 25 that one of the things it would depend on, that is, whether the death penalty is more -- life without parole is more severe, is the person's world view. Can you tell me a little bit more about that?
JUROR: Well, I think just philosophically it's tough to say what would be a worse punishment for someone. A person might view life imprisonment as worse than death, so it's hard to say.
MS. CONRAD: And if -- and when you say the "person," you mean the defendant or the --
JUROR: Any defendant, yeah.
MS. CONRAD: And if the person viewed that as worse, would that change -- how would that affect your view of whether the death penalty would be appropriate?
MR. WEINREB: Objection.
THE COURT: Yeah. I don't think we need to have that answer.
JUROR: Okay.
MS. CONRAD: I see here that you're a writer in your spare time?
JUROR: Sparingly, but yes.
MS. CONRAD: Excuse me?
JUROR: Sparingly, yes.
MS. CONRAD: And what types of things do you write about?
JUROR: Nature, poems.
MS. CONRAD: May I have a moment?
(Counsel confer off the record.)
MS. CONRAD: Would you be able, in deciding whether to vote for the death penalty in any given case, not necessarily this case, to give -- to consider things about not just the crime but about the defendant, such as his background and so forth?
JUROR: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: Would you tend to focus primarily, however, on the crime?
MR. WEINREB: Objection.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MS. CONRAD: If you were not to get paid by your employer, would sitting on this jury be a hardship for you?
JUROR: Absolutely.
MR. WEINREB: Objection.
THE COURT: No, you may answer it.
JUROR: Absolutely.
MS. CONRAD: And you simply don't have any information about whether or not you would get paid?
JUROR: I didn't look into the matter, no. No, I don't.
MS. CONRAD: All right. Thank you very much.
JUROR: All right.
THE COURT: Thank you, sir.
JUROR: All right.
(The juror exits the courtroom.)
MS. CONRAD: Your Honor, before he leaves, with a juror like this, can we ask them to find out? I don't think we want to get them seated and then find out they aren't going to get paid.
THE COURT: I think -- yeah, I guess we can.
MR. WEINREB: Your Honor, in the past when this has come up, the Court's taken the view these things will --
THE COURT: That tends to be my view, that if they weren't, they would know about it.
MR. WEINREB: And I don't think we should have one rule for some jurors, ones the defense would like to get rid of and not ones for the government.
MS. CONRAD: I think we just did. There was an earlier juror who indicated she didn't know if she would get paid.
MR. WEINREB: No.
THE COURT: No, she was an hourly --
MS. CONRAD: But hourly doesn't --
THE COURT: Anyway, he can go.
MS. CONRAD: And, your Honor, may I just also be heard on this last bit, the first questions I asked? I frankly don't understand why asking how someone, a prospective juror, was affected by the bombings is not an appropriate question.
THE COURT: Because I think he answered what the question was getting at, which was a more direct kind of effect than he had various thoughts about the matter.
MS. CONRAD: But I --
THE COURT: So...
MS. CONRAD: It seems to me "how you were affected" is the fundamental question.
THE COURT: Okay.
MS. CLARKE: Your Honor, I think -- I'm sorry.
THE COURT: Before the --
[REDACTED]
MS. CLARKE: I just wanted to alert you to it.
THE COURT: I appreciate that.
I don't know if you know, I was given a stack through the clerk, so I've gone through them quickly. And I'll ask him about it. It's fairly remote and small, but I'll ask him about it.
COURT CLERK: Juror No. 376.
COURT CLERK: Juror 376.
(The juror enters the courtroom.)
COURT CLERK: Sir, over here, if you would. Have a seat.
Do me a favor, keep your voice up and speak into the mic. It's adjustable so you can move it around, and make sure everyone around the table can hear you, okay?
JUROR: All right.
THE COURT: Good morning.
JUROR: Good morning.
THE COURT: Since you were last here, have you been able to avoid discussion of the case with people?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: And also as much as possible avoid any media exposure?
JUROR: Absolutely, yes.
THE COURT: So that's the questionnaire you filled out, and we're going to follow up on some of the questions you gave. We've been asking everybody about their employment. It says you are a delivery driver for Pepsi?
JUROR: Yes.
THE COURT: And you've been doing that for a good ten years or more?
JUROR: Yes, ten years.
THE COURT: We also asked -- if you want to look on page 5, we set forth the schedule of the case including the likely length of the case. If you were to serve for three or four months, would that have an impact on your income or your ability --
JUROR: Oh, my income. I wouldn't lose my job, but I wouldn't want to be out that long if I didn't have to be.
THE COURT: Well, what would the impact --
JUROR: I could work my schedule around it a little bit but...
THE COURT: You could? Tell us how you could do that.
JUROR: I'm just typically Monday through Friday. I could -- I know Fridays they said they weren't going to be in court.
THE COURT: That's right.
JUROR: So I could probably work Friday, Saturday, Sunday if I had to to make up some of the time.
THE COURT: Well, you know, I want to be realistic about it. We don't want to put you in a bind where you really are making a huge sacrifice; on the other hand, if you think you can do both, that's -- and not be, you know, so affected that it would be really hurtful to you, so we kind of -- we can't assess it as well as you can assess it, I guess.
JUROR: Yeah. I know you get somewhat compensated too.
THE COURT: Not very much, but you do.
JUROR: My wife pays the mortgage mostly, so I can't really...
THE COURT: All right.
JUROR: I mean, I don't know what to say. She's more the income-earner than I am, so...
THE COURT: So are you -- do you have a regular route that you deliver?
JUROR: Yeah. Yeah.
THE COURT: So, for example, you have a convenience store or something you deliver things to?
JUROR: Yeah.
THE COURT: Do you go to the same store on a regular basis?
JUROR: Pretty much, see the same people on a regular basis. Same route, same area. I actually deliver down in New Bedford, Dartmouth area is my route, that area.
THE COURT: So you don't think it would be a problem for you. Is that what you're telling me?
JUROR: I have to work something out, yeah, I guess. No, not 100 percent.
THE COURT: All right. I guess here's why we ask the question up-front, and really up-front. It's one of the first questions we ask. We don't want it to become a problem later. If you're sitting and then all of a sudden you say, "I made a bad decision here," we'd rather not have that situation. On the other hand, if you think it's the kind of thing you think you can stand, that's -- and are willing to do it.
JUROR: I thought you didn't have much choice.
(Laughter.)
JUROR: Then everybody could just say, "No, sure, I can't afford it," then you just -- I thought that was basically someone -- you don't have a choice. You got to do what you got to do. So, I mean, I don't know what else...
THE COURT: There are limits. You don't have to do it in the circumstances that would make it a severe hardship. And that's really the question. If you think it would be a severe hardship and cost you earnings that, you know, would really be significant to you, then we won't ask you to do it. On the other hand, if you think you can do it and also keep things running by an adjusted schedule, we'd be happy to have you.
JUROR: Yeah, it definitely would be hard. But, I mean, I don't know. It would be hard as far as schedule. I mean, I take the kids to hockey and that kind of stuff, but, you know, it's just...
THE COURT: Yeah. Okay. Tell me about taking the kids to hockey. How often do you do that?
JUROR: I got a six-year-old. I take him twice a week.
THE COURT: When --
JUROR: He goes Mondays and Wednesdays. He goes to swim on Saturdays.
THE COURT: What time, after school?
JUROR: Yeah, after school. Five o'clock. That kind of stuff.
THE COURT: Well, let's go on with the --
JUROR: Sure.
THE COURT: -- other questions.
JUROR: I didn't write very much down. I wasn't expecting to be called back, honestly.
THE COURT: All right. Sometimes it's difficult to read a juror's writing.
JUROR: Sure.
THE COURT: Page 6 we asked for your -- you know, whether you had -- whether you were married and, if so, what your spouse did.
JUROR: My wife's occupation? Accountant.
THE COURT: Accountant?
JUROR: Yeah.
THE COURT: Tell us about that, what --
JUROR: Her background's in accounting. She does more finance now.
THE COURT: Is she self-employed or work for somebody?
JUROR: No, no, she works for -- it's a London-based company, Inventus. She actually just traveled to France a week ago for work. So she's more of a lead finance, team financier.
THE COURT: Okay.
Could we cut the audio for a minute?
MR. DOREAU: Audio cut.
(Discussion at sidebar and out of the hearing of the public:)
[REDACTED]
COURT CLERK: Back on.
MR. DOREAU: Audio and video on.
JUROR: I didn't even realize that still showed up.