Au Pair Trial

Richard Swerdlin swerdlin at GTE.NET
Tue Nov 18 11:29:28 MST 1997

Papa Paul:

        Non-sequestering probably reflects a cheaper situation.  It also
means more convenience for jurors.

        Considering the wide use of TV, it is unlikely that jurors have
heard or seen nothing about allegations of crime.

Richard Swerdlin
(swerdlin at

> From: PapaPaul <febboy at IX.NETCOM.COM>
> Subject: Re: Au Pair Trial
> Date: Tuesday, November 18, 1997 04:02
> At 07:22 AM 11/17/97 -0800, Jack Tomsky wrote:
> >During trials in which there is a great deal of publicity, the jury
> >is often sequestered. They are kept
> >          as prisoners in a hotel and aren't allowed to read the
> >newspapers or watch television, except in
> >          censored form. I think the judge was highly influenced by
> >public opinion. Maybe he should have
> >          sequestered himself.
> >
> >   Jack
>         I like what you say, Jack.  I like it a lot.
>         What is the rationale they now use for not
>         sequestering themselves?  That they are far
>         superior to us common folk and therefore immune
>         to influence?
>         Regards, PapaPaul

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list