Tucker Prosecution Concerned About Tardiness of Juror

The prosecution in the federal extortion trial of Rep. Walter R. Tucker III expressed concern Thursday about a juror whose tardiness has reportedly angered fellow members of the panel, now in their second week of deliberations.

During a hearing on an unrelated matter before Judge Consuelo B. Marshall, Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven G. Madison said he worried that the juror’s persistent tardiness could possibly indicate “an unwillingness to deliberate.” Unwillingness to deliberate can be grounds for dismissing a juror.

Madison did not identify the juror but said other panelists had expressed their displeasure to court staff.

But the judge responded that the prosecution’s concerns were premature, adding that the jury, which has now deliberated eight days, appears to be working diligently.

It was the first indication of friction among the jurors since the start of deliberations and it came during a hearing on a request by the panel for clarification of the court’s instructions on entrapment.

Essentially, the jury wanted to know if the government’s star witness, businessman-turned-FBI informant John Macardican, should be considered a “government agent” as it relates to the entrapment section of jury instructions. After a discussion with lawyers, Judge Marshall told the jurors yes, and they returned to deliberate further.