Haun Jurors Posing Own Questions

In most criminal cases, a jury deciding the guilt or innocence of a defendant absorbs testimony like a silent sponge, rarely participating in the questioning of a witness.

But in the murder trial of Diana Haun, the 12 jurors and six alternates have taken advantage of an invitation by Judge Frederick A. Jones to make inquiries.

During the first three weeks of testimony, in fact, individual jurors have passed notes on almost a daily basis, posing questions to various witnesses.

The questions have focused mostly on hard facts: the defendant’s shoe size, her eating habits, the license plate on the blue-green car that witnesses said they saw victim Sherri Dally getting into on the morning she disappeared.

They have not addressed the anecdotal testimony of numerous witnesses who have talked about the love triangle involving Haun, her lover Michael Dally and his wife.

Dally and Haun are accused of plotting the killing of Sherri Dally. They are charged with murder, conspiracy and kidnapping, plus special allegations making them eligible for the death penalty. They face separate trials.

Inviting jurors to ask questions is an unusual practice in California courts, legal experts say, one left entirely to the discretion of individual judges. Some encourage it, others don’t.

“It is not customary, and it is not something you encounter in every case,” longtime Ventura attorney George Eskin said. “But it is certainly a good sign because it suggests they are paying attention.”

In the Haun case, the jury indeed appears to be paying close attention to the testimony.

*

Individual jurors--who are strictly admonished from discussing the case among themselves--silently take notes and appear to carefully study documents provided to them by the attorneys.

And they keep coming up with questions posed by neither prosecutors nor defense attorneys.

It is common now to see a piece of folded white paper make its way across the courtroom in a bailiff’s hands to the judge, who then passes it to attorneys who ultimately pose the juror’s question to the witness.

A juror initiated the practice on the second day of testimony, posing a question based on remarks made in opening statements.

Deputy Public Defender Neil B. Quinn told the jury in his opening remarks that Haun was a vegetarian who could not stand to see an animal hurt--let alone a person capable of killing a human being.

The next day, one of Haun’s co-workers testified about seeing her feed Michael Dally with chopsticks. In response to the testimony, a juror asked this question: “What types of food would Haun eat?”

*

A few days later, a detective told the jury about purchases Haun made at Kmart two days before Sherri Dally was killed. The purchases included a camping ax, garbage bags, poster board and a towel, Cpl. John Leach testified.

He also said that during a search of Haun’s Port Hueneme home, investigators found similar items, including the same type of garbage bags and poster board. Before he stepped down from the witness stand, a juror asked this question: “Had the trash bags been opened?”

Yes, Leach testified, but he was unsure how many bags were missing from the box. He said it “felt lighter.”

Eskin said the jurors’ questions indicate they are scrutinizing every detail, which in the end could benefit either the prosecution or defense.

From a lawyer’s standpoint, he explained, a juror’s questions provide an insight into what information they are seeking to base a final judgment.

“I think that it is good because it may telegraph some of the things the jurors are interested in,” he said. “It is the only communication that you are going to get from the jury.”

The practice of allowing jurors to ask questions varies from state to state, legal experts say.

In Arizona, jurors have the right to ask questions during any trial--state or federal.

*

In California, it is not standard practice and it is actually fairly rare, said Laurie Levenson, Loyola Law School associate dean. But that is changing, she said.

“There are proposals to make it the standard practice,” Levenson said. “Federal judges in California are studying it right now, trying to decide if it should be a court rule.”

State courts are also looking at the practice, she said, partly in light of studies that have shown jurors are happier and more involved in the court process when allowed some participation.

A national study conducted in 1994 by two professors on behalf of the American Judicature Society found that when allowed, 72% of jurors asked questions during trials.

In criminal trials, researchers found jurors asked questions at a rate of one about every two hours, 77% of which were directed to the prosecution and 23% at the defense.

“The study seemed to find that it had no impact on the verdict,” Levenson said. “The bottom line is that jurors are more enthusiastic.”

Jurors asking questions, however, can create problems.

The last thing litigators or a judge wants is for jurors to become judgmental based on answers to their own questions and start making decisions about a case before they retire to the jury room.

Oxnard attorney David Shain said he recently tried a case in which jurors asked so many questions--about half a dozen daily--that it became distracting.

“It can be frustrating,” Shain said. “On the one hand, you like the idea of jurors becoming involved. But sometimes it can create some issues for the attorney.

“You have a particular plan as to how you are going to present your case,” Shain added. “And although they may be good questions, they may not fit in with the framework you have in mind.”

But Levenson said in her experience and research, “By and large, judges have been able to control it and it has not been disruptive.”

“It is like jurors have this newfound freedom,” she said. “I actually favor it because I think jurors involved in the trial are more invested.”