Citizenship in the Nation

Years ago, as a Boy Scout, I remember getting the Citizenship series of merit badges and more recently have taught Citizenship in the World at the district pow-wows. This week I have had a chance to watch and participate as a juror in our constitutional right to a trial by jury. A month ago I received a summons to appear Tues. Feb. 24 at 8:45 am at the Kane County Courthouse for jury selection. I've never had to appear before and had always sent my card back in noting my occupation and potential hardship to employees and patients. Helping somewhat was the fact that for several years after dad retired I was the only dentist in town. I guess that doesn't carry any weight anymore because I called the courthouse explaining my situation and in essence they told me to show up because only the judge could excuse me.

I showed up at the appointed time along with twenty or so others and started to go through the selection process. First, several were dismissed outright for various reasons: one had a new baby, a couple of others had health or serious family issues. As the selection process went on, sixteen of us were chosen for the initial panel. We were told that the trial involved a hunting license issue, specifically fraudulently obtaining a hunting license and several people were removed due to animal rights and anti-hunting biases (read: Best Frienders!). Their spots were given to most of the remaining pool and then the lawyers whittled us down to eight jurors. I was surprised to be picked as one of the final eight.

After the selection was made, the judge had the bailiff give us all outlines of our duty and went carefully through them with us. We then moved right into the trial. The prosecution stated the case against the defendant and called the witnesses: the ex-wife and her parents, and two investigators with the Division of Wildlife Resources. It was just like TV, only not as dramatic! The prosecution questioned them, and in turn, the defense did the same. This took us up until about 5 pm, when a recess for the night was declared. The jury was admonished not to talk about the case, research the case, have contact with the defendant, witnesses, attornies, or any one else involved with the case. We were a varied lot; from an elderly widow to a young newlywed, retired to working, long-time residents to recent move-ins, three men and five women.

The trial resumed at 9 the next morning. Well, it was to resume at 9: we got there and were kept waiting until 9:45 while the lawyers and judge hashed out some issues. We then heard from the defendant and went to lunch early at about 11 am. When we resumed at 12:30 we were given additional papers explaining the exact charges and what we were to consider while deliberating. The defendant, an avid hunter, was charged with: 1a- wantonly taking wildlife without a valid permit, 1b- possesion of wildlife parts without a valid permit, 2- knowingly obtaining a permit using false information, 3- the taking of a deer without a valid permit on or about September 5, 2003, and 4- the taking of a trophy deer without a valid permit. That is not the exact legalese, but close enough.

It was a nice deer, too. 32-inch spread, huge, heavy beams. Anyway, it didn't take us long once we were in the jury room to arrive at a consenus. We did talk through everything anyway to make sure we all understood the charges, the evidence presented, and the testimony of the witnesses. In the end, though, it boiled down to the fact that the defendant and knowingly applied for and received a resident hunting license while in fact being a resident of California. Voting records, drivers' license, phone #'s, domestic addresses all point to continuous residence in California for years, with only occasional visits to Payson.

It was an interesting experience, but one I don't hope to repeat anytime soon. I'm glad the evidence was so clear-cut (in our minds, anyway) in this case. It made our job considerably easier.