Watching the jury, hoping for justice

If there's anything more fascinating than watching experts try to interpret a jury's behavior, it's watching lay people trying to interpret a jury's behavior.

Thus we had the scenario on Friday in which the Herman Thomas jury went home for the weekend, with instructions to return Monday. (Thomas is the former Mobile County circuit judge who is accused of paddling and sexually abusing jail inmates.)

Predictably, the defense attorney said the fact that the jury hadn't reached a verdict by week's end was an indication that it may be deadlocked.

Predictably, the prosecutor said it was an indication that the jury is carefully considering the multitude of witnesses, alleged victims and charges.

And predictably, people outside of the courthouse — ordinary folks in the community — had their own, less expert but reasonably plausible explanations of why the jurors called it quits when they did.

For example, you hate to think that the wheels of justice are linked to college football, but as a friend of mine said, "Would you want the people on your jury — the ones who hold your freedom in their hands — deliberating on Saturday while wishing they were watching Alabama play Tennessee? No. You would want them at home in front of the television."

Meanwhile, some people said the fact that jurors asked the presiding judge to repeat his jury instructions means they're going to acquit the defendant.

"If they thought he was guilty, they wouldn't be confused," one person explained to me. "They're looking for a way to let him off."

But other people said the fact that jurors asked the presiding judge to repeat his jury instructions means they're going to convict the defendant.

"If they thought he was innocent, they wouldn't be confused," another person countered. "They're looking for a way to convict him."

Other acquaintances read varying meanings into a question jurors asked the judge about an attempted-sodomy charge, while some people debated whether the jury will view the inmates as sympathetic victims or conniving criminals.

People also tried to decide how jurors were affected by the tearful testimony of some of the alleged victims' mothers, and also how the jury might weigh the testimony of a retired archbishop on behalf of Thomas. (I overheard a couple of folks wondering if jurors would see any irony in a Catholic bishop testifying at a sex-abuse trial.)

I do not know what will happen tomorrow when jurors resume their deliberations, but I do know that — all speculation, observations and musings aside — they bear an enormous burden as they sift through evidence and testimony in search of the truth.

Their decision will determine whether a man goes free or goes to prison. It will speak volumes about the integrity of the Mobile County justice system.

Most important, whether people agree or disagree with the jury's decision, the verdict will reaffirm everything we say we believe about our right to an impartial jury, a vigorous defense and a fair prosecution.

God willing, Herman Thomas' jurors will make the right call, whatever it may be.