Simpson Case Jurors’ Boycott

Re “Transfer of Deputies Provokes Boycott by 13 Simpson Jurors,” April 22:

Could it be the Simpson jurors are trying to tell us with their dramatic actions that, in spite of what all the experts seem to think, they are not torn apart by racial strife and are fully capable of making intelligent decisions as a group?

DICK ADLER

Venice

*

Everyone understands that the Simpson jurors are tired of sequestration and the boredom of endless days when the court is not in session, but I think the court and the attorneys overlook the fact that these jurors have grown up with television. They expect brief “sound bites” on the news, quick, to-the-point commercials and punch lines every 30 or 40 seconds. It’s no wonder their irritation is heightened when they are forced to listen to endless court testimony--no matter how legally important--that sounds like attorneys are beating a corral of dead horses.

BILL WALKER

Studio City

*

Simpson’s lawyers have attacked the neighbors, the police, the technicians, the results and now Judge Lance Ito. After Judge Ito, I suppose it will be the bailiff and then the court reporter. When they finish with them, I suppose they will begin gnawing on the furniture.

This kind of search for the truth leaves us wondering if the sun actually came up when the meteorologists said it did that morning. No one knows for sure, do they? With this kind of anarchy, no wonder the jury’s halfway out the door.

KAREN SODIKOFF

Del Mar

*

As the days for the sequestered jurors have become weeks and now months, it occurs to me that the same sacrifices--living away from family and home--should be imposed on those who have the power to move this trial along.

While the jurors “amuse” themselves during the 400-plus sidebars and are “excused” from the courtroom more than 40% of the time, all of which, while presumed necessary, lengthens the jurors’ incarceration, the judge, the prosecuting attorneys and the defense attorneys go home to their families at night, on weekends and on holidays.

Judge Ito is looking for ways to improve the process and speed up the trial. Let’s see what happens if he and the two sets of opposing attorneys sequester themselves. I believe that a thorough, but quicker, trial will result.

GERALD R. MENEFEE

West Covina

Re “Some ‘Sacred Cows’ Are Worth Rethinking,” Commentary, April 24:

Sidney Irmas makes several good points, but I think he misses the most important one: The system for selecting jurors is badly flawed. (Perhaps those who established and maintain the system have too little real experience in serving on juries.) Too many (certainly not all) who serve on the juries do not really understand all of the judge’s instructions; some are biased, and may not realize it; some do not understand the admissibility of circumstantial evidence; some do not understand what it means to be “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”

A good attorney (highly paid?) can take advantage of these flaws. The result is that money or prejudice or ignorance--or a combination thereof--is likely to be the deciding factor in a trial, rather than the truth--which is the real objective of the event.

GEORGE EPSTEIN

Los Angeles