Juror Says He Felt No Bias, Just Didn’t Want to Serve

One of the two jurors who an appellate court declared was excluded from an Orange County jury because of racial bias said Friday that he felt there was no discrimination and that he didn’t want to serve on the jury in the first place.

Tuoc Vo, 30, of Anaheim said in an interview that, in fact, he exaggerated his problems with English in order to be dismissed from the jury in the 1986 murder trial of Ruben Valle. Vo said he was helping to support his parents and couldn’t afford to take time off from work.

A state appellate court reversed the Valle conviction and ordered a new trial for Valle this week after concluding that Deputy Dist. Atty. Richard King showed bias against Vietnamese in rejecting Vo. King contends that Vo, who came to the United States in 1975, was not selected because he had difficulty speaking English.

Said Bias Caused 2nd Exclusion

The court said the dismissal of a second juror--Gregory Leon, a Latino--was also based on racial bias. But court files show a letter from Leon’s employer to the court stating that Leon would not be paid for time spent serving on the jury. The letter states that Leon had requested that the letter be sent.

Leon could not be reached for comment.

A jury convicted Valle of two counts of murder for ramming an auto and killing two Costa Mesa teen-agers while fleeing police in a stolen van in 1984.

Vo, now married and the father of a newborn son, said in an interview that he was worried when he was called as one of 90 prospective jurors. “Let me tell you, I went in there and I was scared,” Vo said. “I just wanted to get out of there.”

Vo said he was willing to do anything legal to avoid the time off from work. He acknowledged that he “exaggerated” his difficulties with English when he was questioned by lawyers in hopes of being rejected. He said he “knew that’s one way” to avoid selection.

“I didn’t feel discriminated against,” Vo said.

On Basis of Group Bias

When asked during the trial why he had rejected Vo, King said he believed that Vo’s difficulties with the language were the sort that many “members of the Oriental race” experience when trying to learn English. The appellate court concluded that King’s challenge of Vo was on the basis of group bias, thus violating Valle’s right to have a jury drawn from a representative cross-section of the community.

With little elaboration, the appellate justices said that King’s exclusion of Leon also demonstrated bias. The court stated that despite King’s claims that his action was based on the man’s difficulties with language, the limited questions he asked did not support that explanation.

The letter from Leon’s employer, Cherry Division of Textron Inc. of Irvine, was one of two in the file from employers of potential jurors.

“Our employee, Gregory Leon, has requested that we advise you of our company policy regarding jury duty,” the letter states. “Cherry Division of Textron does not compensate employees who serve on jury duty. Time off may be allowed without pay if necessary.”

A Textron executive, Marti Noyes, said the policy remains unchanged. “To me, I think that’s why he was excused, not the other thing,” Noyes said.

Vo--and apparently Leon--are considered typical of those called for jury duty: They don’t really want to lose work time. According to Evelyn Valle (no relation to the defendant), jury services supervisor for the Orange County Superior Court, about 13,000 people are summoned for duty each month, but only about 24% even bother to respond. Valle pointed out, however, that residents who fail to respond to a summons for jury service are subject to a $250 fine.

Some are exempted from jury service, Valle said. Police officers and students may not be called. Exemptions may be granted if a potential juror demonstrates financial hardship by showing, for example, that his employer will not pay for the time off.

“Their initial thoughts are they don’t want to be here. They have a negative feeling from the start,” Valle said. Most jurors change their minds after participating, she said.

In the Valle case, the state appellate court also ruled that admissions made by the defendant should not have been used at the trial because he did not voluntarily give up his right to remain silent and to consult a lawyer.

King said his office will probably appeal the decision. Ruben Valle will not be released from Folsom Prison, where he is serving two sentences of 15 years to life, before the new trial, lawyers said.