Introduction: We watched a lot of interesting litigation
during our Criminal Court Week. But what
did we learn? It’s time to take our notes
and turn them in to learning.
Task: Share
your personal reflections about what stood out to you in this trial.
It can be a part of the trial, a lawyer, the judge, a witness, something
that was said...anything you feel it's important to share.
Directions: Write a 5 sentence paragraph or more blog post. And write a reaction to two other blog posts from your classmates.
Blog post - 10 pts - Your reaction to the truck driver case experience. You can write about the courtroom, the lawyers, the witness, the judge, or anything that stood out to you. Review the notes you took in the case to help guide you with this.(5 sentence paragraph or more).
Reaction to others blog posts - 10 pts - React thoughtfully to others posts. What did you think of what they saw? (Questions, wonderings, connections) Write 2-3 sentences or more reacting to what they said.
Related website - list a website that will help us all dig deeper. This could be about any connected topic you want including anything. It can be
about anything that relates (a similar story, a site about one of the
charges, another case about the courthouse, etc...(5 pts)
Finally, explain your website. What's it about and how does it relate? (1-2 sentences or more) (5 pts)
Finally, explain your website. What's it about and how does it relate? (1-2 sentences or more) (5 pts)
10 pts - paragraph or more blog post
10 pts - reacting to others blog posts (2 or more)
5 pts - a website (see above)
total for this section (part 3 from our packet)
5 pts - explanation of your website - how it relates
5 pts - explanation of your website - how it relates
=30 pts
So we entered the courtroom on 2.12.18. They were finishing jury selection...I spoke with a woman who ended up being an intern with the DA. She said that the truck driver was offered a plea deal for between 2-4 years and I was told that he refused the plea bargain. Eventually the jury came in and everyone stood.
ReplyDeleteAfter some quick jury instructions the prosecution started their opening statements.
"Safety 1st, no excuses!" the prosecuting attorney said, "that's what it says on the side of Joseph Zucco's truck!"
She went on to us a lot of inflamatory facts and statements like 'barrel down' & that the deceased 'waited their turn'. Also,high rates of speed were discussed. I noticed that they lawyer used their opinion (as they should) in the opening statement.
I gathered that this mixture of facts and opinion by the prosecuting attorney was a legal way to tell a story to the jury. This was a good opening statement.
In addition, the attorney explained what the prosecution will share, the charges against the defendant, what the prosecution witnesses will show, and what must be done to prove the crime. In addition, she explained who we'd be hearing from on the prostitution's side. She used no notes on during this opening statement. She was very impressive.
While I didn't hear the entire opening statement for the defense, I still got a lot of information out of it. There was a different tone. The theme was 'having an accident was not a crime'. The burden of proof was discussed too.
Brea Neal:
DeleteThe quote "safety first, no excuse" really stood out to me too. I really thought that helped add to her case.I really didn't like how his lawyer started off his opening statement because it didn't catch my attention right away. I felt like all his incidence was going to be based off of opinions. You're overall piece was good it seems that you really liked and was interest in the case on the first day.
Ps: Do you remember when the guy said we could leave and we really couldn't? HA good times.
Yes...embarrassingly I do.
DeleteThe prosecution's theme of " safety first, no excuse" i agreed did set tone. When I heard it I thought the jury would definitely be heavily influenced by it.
DeleteBrea Neal:
ReplyDeleteDuring our criminal court week experience, I was able to see first had how a trail actually worked. Something and or someone that really stood out to me was the district attorney’s office lawyer. It really stood out to me how she started her opening statement. The first thing that she said was “Safety first, no excuse.” The lawyer kept saying that over and over again. I like how she fit that “phrase into her case by saying that, that was something Joseph threw out the window. She really did a good job in developing her case in opening statements. She left me wanting to know everything about the case and thinking he was quilt just from opening. From court week I got to really see and analyze what lawyers do and how they open and close cases.
The phrase "Safety first, no excuses," stood out to me as well. In my eyes i believe that this is what should've gotten him found guilty of his crime. As soon as he decided to speed, that was the moment that he throw everything out the window and no once did he think about any of the consequences that could've happened.-Aaliyah Warden
DeleteI agree Brea. People relate to stories. And opening statement is an opportunity to tell your story and set the narrative. I felt the prosecuting attorney did a great job as well. She recreated a moment in time very well. I felt like I was there!
DeleteI believe that with this vehicular manslaughter case all the evidence was there. Although the drive wasn't uner the influence nor on his phone I still believe he is guilty for the crime he has commit. Instead of slowing down and or stopping he decided to speed up and run a red light, causing him to lose control of his truck and ramming into a minivan killing the driver (daughter) at the scene and the passenger (father) later at the hospital. In my opinion I feel he should've had some type of consequence. There was a detective that recover videos of the crash from the light camera and from a strangers dashboard camera and the truck drivers dashboard camera. From those videos you were clearly able to see that the truck drive was already going over the speed limit and still continued to speed up to catch the light, where which he then crashed into the minivan.This truck driver should've been found guilty of Involuntary manslaughter, and failure to stop at a red light, which are both of the things he has committed. https://legaldictionary.net/vehicular-manslaughter/. This website deeply explains what vehicular manslaughter is, the different types of vehicular manslaughter, and the different type of sentencing for throughout different states for this criminal act. This website also shares a story of an accident that happened on May 30th back in 2008, where a pregent woman, was speeding down a 30mph road and smashed into another car killing a husband and wife, and also causing injuries to her own baby, where they had to give her a c-section to get the baby out, and they baby died 6 days later. Jorgensen was indicted 13 months later on three counts of manslaughter in the second degree, one count of aggravated vehicular homicide, and one count of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. She was found not guilty of all, but was retried for the death of her baby which died because of the accidents. This case greatly connects with the case that we were doing because both were found not guilty of a crime they have committed which took the lives of many innocent people.-Aaliyah Warden
ReplyDeleteBrea Neal:
DeleteI agree with a lot of the things that you said. It is upsetting to me to know that he was found not guilty and can go on with his life while two lives are lost. Like he said he chose to accelerate instead of slowing down. He loosed control and now families are without their loved ones. I do agree with you in saying he could have a conquence although it sounded in the video that he felt really bad for what he had done. I feel like if he was really truly sorry for what he had did he would’ve helped in saving their lives instead of crying by his truck. Overall, I think you have a really good blog with some really good points to it.
Good thoughts on our case Aaliyah and what an interesting case you found and shared with us!
DeleteDid you find out how the retrial went in regards to her being charged with the murder of her baby?
I concur, the case seemed quite evident to me that he was guilty and like you said, although he wasn't under the influence, he still drove quite recklessly enough to end two innocent peoples lives
DeleteOn the second day, we walked in during the middle of testimony. If my memory serves me correctly, it was the prosecution who were testifying.
ReplyDeleteDuring this testimony, there were expert witnesses testifying. The first expert witness I heard knew a lot about technologies on the truck. He discussed QUALCOM. This technology 'pings' the automobile and collects all kinds of data. The QUALCOM data showed that the driver was driving between 53.5 -56? miles an hour. There was a lot of science that was explained about this technology which he discussed. The defense may have redirected but I don't have any notes that say that anything significant happened on this cross.
The second witness for the prosecution was Detective Robert Matthew Dotts (not sure if that's the correct spelling) from the Derry Twsp. police. He was an expert in digital forensics. This witness shared two videos.
The first video was from the dashboard cam of a driver who was at the scene. He took the sd card and burned the dashboard camera data on to a cd. I wonder how police in this situation feel when the side they testify looses?
Anyway, the video had no sound, was lagging, and it was hard to see anything at all that could've been deemed very useful.
The defense attorney cross examined. This attorney focused on the train/rail car that we traveling adjacent to the road where the accident took place.
The other video was much more revealing.
The second video was much more clear. It was the video that was in the cab of the truck. At first the video was shown without sound. In the video, you can see the truck driving, hitting the car, and the front of the truck crumpling. It looked damning but the judge asked if there was sound and the video was played again. In my opinion, this time the video made the driver much more human since you can hear him cry when he realized that the woman was badly hurt and/or dying.
I walked away feeling bad. I was thinking what a huge responsibility it is when you get behind the wheel. If there was different jury, or if this occurred on another day, someone could have been put away for several years.
That wasn't the case here though. Joseph Zucco walked away a free man.
In your opinion do you believe that they still should've found Joseph guilty? I feel as though that the video was the root to it all. The second video showed great detail of everthing that happened, and even though we hear Joseph crying because he was sorry, but him crying doesn't bring back those two people. In my opinion he should've been found guilty. I wonder if he talked to the family? or is willing to help the family?-Aaliyah Warden
DeleteI believe he was guilty of involuntary manslaughter.
DeleteHere's a website that talks about juries in this part of the state.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/jury-faqs
This website covers a wide range of jury related issues and is laid out on a FAQ style Q&A session which makes it easily accessible.
Brea Neal:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Vehicular-manslaughter.htm
This site relates to what we have been talking about in class. On this site is define what vehicular manslaughter really is. This site also goes on to talk about that type of driving that can result in being charged with vehicular manslaughter. From this site I can see why maybe that man was found not guilty for that charge.
I can't access your link...:-(
Deletehttps://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Vehicular-manslaughter.htm
DeleteThe truck driver case had quite a few things that stood out for me. The biggest that stood out to me was the lawyers of the defense and prosecution, the defense's lawyer was pretty nonchalant and had a lazy way of speaking towards the jury about the case. While on the other hand the prosecution lawyer was quite convincing with her opening statement on how the defendant was guilty of the crime. when we arrived in the courtroom it was deadly quiet as they were selecting the jury, and that took about 30 minutes to do. We learned that this case took place 2 years ago on January 22, 2016 which resulted in the death of a daughter and her father. Probably, in what I believe to be the biggest point in the case, the prosecution brought the video of the crash to court as evidence in hopes that the video would without a doubt prove the defendant is guilty. But the judge wanted more out of the video and requested audio to be heard, which allowed the jury to hear the cries of the defendant as he realize what he has done. A day later we found out he was found not guilty, and I personally believe that the video helped tremendously towards that.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with you that he came off lazy. I think he was trying to act nonthreatening. I can see your point though.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttp://injury.findlaw.com/car-accidents/common-causes-of-commercial-truck-accidents.html
ReplyDeleteThis website gives some insight on truck crashes,and how they tend to happen. I figured this would relate to the case as the argument was over whether or not this was an accident.
Interesting website! Here's one I found earlier that I thought you may find interesting.
Deletehttps://www.thetruckersreport.com/facts-about-trucks/
During criminal court week we first saw the case of Joseph Zucco, Jr., 61, of Sanford, Maine, was charged with 2 counts of Homicide by Vehicle and 2 counts of Involuntary Manslaughter. Day 1 we watched the ending of jury selection which took approx. an hour and a half which consisted of 12 people and 4 backup/replacements. Following jury selection, each lawyer presented their opening statements. The defendant arrived dressed unprofessionally. The accident took place at the intersection of Hersheypark Drive/Walton Avenue/Mae Street on February 2, 2016. The truck driver went through a red light and crashed into a van instantly killing the driver and 4 hours after hospitilazation killed the passenger.The driver, Julie Watson, 49, and the passenger, Watson’s father, George Storer, 83 died. In the court room<the defendant"s attorney remained calm and collective throughout the case which later resulted in the defendant being not guilty. Something that caught my attention was the amount of evidence and the technique in which the prosecutor used. But one major mistake she made was the time when she played the video footage and tried to play it without sound. But she was then caught in her bafoonery when the judge asked for audio to be played. Yes i did use the term bafoonery. This experience was great and i am looking forward to court week #2.
ReplyDelete-Khalil Davis
http://www.harrisburgdefense.com/homicide-vehicle/
ReplyDeleteThis gives a deeper insite on laws and regulations presented in the state of Pennsylvania and Harrisburg city.
-KhalilDavis