Comments on: Gordan Lee: Mistrial declared

by: Patrick Gerard

Sat, 10 Nov 2007 10:15:42 +0000

From what I gather, the defense felt the jury was in their favor because they’d eliminated everyone who had heard of the prior conviction or participated in any pro-censorship activity.

The prosecutor broke his agreement with the judge and tainted the jury by mentioning the prior conviction in his opening statement. At that point, the jury was no longer necessarily in the defense’s favor.

The judge has agreed that jurors will be disqualified if they’re aware of Gordon’s prior conviction or if they’ve followed any news coverage which mentions it.

Unfortunately, because the coverage of the mistrial, by default, mentions it, that probably means that anyone who’s aware of the mistrial can’t serve either.

I’m not sure how Gordon is supposed to get a jury trial…

by: Rick Rottman

Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:30:14 +0000

What I don’t understand is why if the defense truly felt as though they had a jury that looked more defense oriented why they would push for the mistrial. Especially for something as insignificant as Lee telling the police that he had been through this before. I’m fairly certain Lee’s early conviction for selling pornography was common knowledge along with his subsequent civil lawsuit against the city.

Chances are some on the jury already knew this. Because of the news of this mistrial, the chances are even greater that the next jury will know it.

by: Ken

Wed, 07 Nov 2007 03:12:15 +0000

It sounds like if it was intentional, what the DA wants is to stall until they can get a plea. DAs aren’t in the business of conducting cases they are going to lose.

by: Paul D. Storrie

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:45:20 +0000

The way this should have gone down, in a reasonable society, is like this:

Parent: Hey! You gave my kid a comic that has objectionable material in it!

Retailer: Wow. I’m really sorry. It’s been a hectic day and someone must have made a mistake. Again, very sorry. Here are the age-appropriate comics. Please feel free to pick one that you think your child will enjoy.

Parent: It was just a mistake? OK, thanks for your apology. Let me take a look at the other selections.

My understanding is that the above pretty much took place, except for the third part.

From everything I’ve been able to discern, this was an honest mistake that required nothing more than an apology to resolve. The fact that it’s gone on as long as it has is both a travesty of justice and a sad commentary on how irrational and unreasonable certain portions of our society are determined to remain.

PDS

by: Rick Rottman

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:29:08 +0000

“Why don’t the prosecutors just drop this case or offer a plea where the guy pays a $500 fine?”

The CBLDF has a policy to only take on cases where the accused agrees not to accept a plea deal. If the accused will not agree to this stipulation, the CBLDF will not provide assistance. The vast majority of criminal cases are resolved through a plea bargain, especially misdemeanors. Because of this policy, the prosecutor is more or less forced to either drop all the charges or peruse the case to the fullest extent of the law.

by: Nat Gertler

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 14:36:48 +0000

They may have offered a plea deal. The CBLDF’s goal is for him not to be found legally guilty. Accepting a plea deal means claiming guilt.

by: Marcus Lusk

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 14:36:43 +0000

From today’s Rome News-Tribune:

“We hope to get this on the next available misdemeanor trial calendar,” said District Attorney Leigh Patterson. “I don’t know exactly when that is, but I gather it’ll be after the first of the year.”

http://news.mywebpal.com/partners/680/public/news851528.html

by: Patrick Dean

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 14:33:55 +0000

Dear John Tully;
Please knock it off.

by: Bill

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 14:28:32 +0000

Wasn’t this the plot of a Pauly Shore movie?

by: Marcus Lusk

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 14:15:39 +0000

I sure hope the motion to dismiss is granted. This thing should never have come to trial in the first place.
The history of misconduct and abuses by the prosecutors in Rome is truly stunning. And now they’ve intentionally caused a mistrial, probably because they didn’t like the look of the jury *they* helped select…driving Gordon’s legal fees even higher.
Eighty. Thousand. Dollars. Now, THERE’S the obscenity.

Thank God for the CBLDF.

by: Tom S.

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 14:08:56 +0000

Why don’t the prosecutors just drop this case or offer a plea where the guy pays a $500 fine? This county has nothing better to do with Taxpayers money than this. I hope the county has to pay CBLDF’s expenses after it is all said and done. This guy may not get a fair trial unless this is moved out of this county.