(WXYZ) - In our court justice system, the 12 men and women who serve on a jury are an irreplaceable cog in the wheel of criminal justice. But the next time you're called to serve, some controversial changes may be in place for jury duty.
For David Wayne Cluseman, a stark verdict was handed down and now prison awaits. But this was an historic day in Oakland County Circuit Court, where jury reform was as much center stage as the accused. Unlike the countless trials before it, this seven man, five woman jury was allowed to participate well beyond the passive decision-makers of the past. Attorney Tom Cranmer tells how it's done now.
"Jurors from time to time are able to take notes, if the judge allows it," says Cranmer. "Occasionally, much less frequently, they're allowed to ask questions, again filtered through the judge. And, as far as deliberating during the course of the trial is concerned, that doesn't happen at all."
But under the pilot project ordered by the Michigan Supreme Court, controversial changes for jurors are being tested by a dozen circuit judges. In this case before Oakland County Judge Wendy Potts, jurors could take notes during the trial, discuss evidence and courtroom theatre amongst themselves during the proceedings, and ask questions along the way.
A dozen times in this case, jurors sent note-questions to the judge, who then presented them to lawyers from both sides to approve, then to ask a witness.
After the verdict was in, and with the judge's permission, these jurors agreed to discuss their experiences, if we didn't use their names.
"It was such a vastly different experience, this time to the last," said Juror #4.
They appreciated the value of taking notes, but were puzzled by restrictions on how, and when, they could read them.
"You were given a binder, but were only allowed to use the binder when we were listening to witnesses," said another Juror. "Every time we went to lunch, we had to leave those books in our seats."
The ability to ask questions during trial allowed jurors to fill in the blanks, when lawyers didn't ask what jurors felt was important.
"They're so close to the case, sometimes they don't realize they take certain things for granted," said Juror #8. "So, rather than have a prosecutor/defense attorney build a case for us, we were able to build the case all the way along."
For a host of reasons, the prosecution and the defense objected to the pilot changes, especially in a capital trial. But on this first step toward jury reform in Michigan, the jurors felt empowered and important.
