Court Hears Claim of Juror Misconduct in Nesler’s Appeal

A jury’s deliberations were tainted by one member persistently claiming special knowledge about a woman who killed her son’s alleged molester, an attorney argued this week.

Three appellate justices on Thursday heard arguments for and against freeing Ellie Nesler, the Sonora woman whose actions sparked a debate about vigilante justice. The 5th District Court of Appeal is expected to issue a ruling within 90 days.

The defense wants the conviction overturned on grounds of judicial error and says a finding that Nesler was sane should be overturned because of juror misconduct.

Juror Catherine Boje told fellow jurors during sanity deliberations, “Oh, if only you knew what I know,” defense attorney Paul Couenhoven said.

“Boje persisted in that conduct and when told not to, said, ‘I know I’m not supposed to say this’ and said it anyway,” Couenhoven said. “That is bias.”

But Deputy Atty. Gen. Janet E. Neeley argued that trial Judge William Polley made “a factual finding that Boje was not actually biased. He found no indication of bias or prejudgment.”

Nesler is serving a 10-year prison sentence for shooting Daniel Mark Driver five times in the back of the head during a recess at his Justice Court preliminary hearing on molestation charges April 2, 1993.

The circumstances surrounding the killing caused some people to hail Nesler as a heroine. Others deplored her taking the law into her own hands.