The Jury Foreman

The State is not God. It has not the right to take away what it cannot restore when it wants to. ― Anton Chekhov

Five hundred (500) citizens were called, seventy-three (73) showed up, twelve (12) were chosen.

And I was named Presiding Juror.

Anything to be of public service and still get paid as a marketing slave for Fred Meyer. Because if we don’t show up, we don’t have a jury. Then we don’t have the Sixth Amendment protections. Like the judge told us, “It’s a tedious process at times. There are a lot of delays, but it’s the best system anywhere in the world.” That was three decades ago, so I’m not sure that’s still true. If it ever was.

Gotta be more fun than work. You feel me, I know you do.

August 24, 1987. Room 508. Circuit Court Judge Stephen L. Gallagher, Jr. looked like a judge, wearing a light grey summer suit, white pocket hankie. Balding, ruddy complexion. We have been selected out of the normal process, he tells us. We’ve been called just for this one trial. I feel special.

It’s a murder trial. Homicide case. Possible Aggravated Murder. The intentional taking of a life while defendant was alleged to be engaged in a felony. Armed robbery. These are the only circumstances which can lead to the death penalty in Oregon. Execution by lethal injection.

A robbery of a North Portland tavern and the bartender/manager was slain. Judge did not use the word “allegedly.” We are asked to avoid the media. No coverage of the case whatsoever. I immediately wonder what they’re hiding.

State of Oregon vs. Carl Lee Dixon. Carl Lee Dixon who is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty.

Two phases to the trial. Phase One is the case on the merits. Guilty or not guilty? If guilty, then Phase Two. The same jury determines the penalty.

When you weigh the penalty, you must ask yourself three questions. Was it a deliberate act? Deliberate is more than intentional. Was it in excess of any provocation? And my favorite. Is it more probable than not the accused will commit more violent acts in the future?

Told us to come right back here tomorrow. Be on time.

0902. I was two minutes late. I slept in. At Fred Meyer, we didn’t get to sleep in.

A juror gets paid ten dollars ($10) daily. Plus eight cents a mile. Call it eleven bucks.

Minus seven dollars for parking. Carry the four… Yesterday I spent ten dollars on lunch. Might not be making a profit, but I did see a young lady with twelve (12) studs in one ear which we both guessed might just be the Oregon record.

Talked to a fifty-two-year-old suburbanite with a Bella Abzug hat. Purple cow pie with feathers. Different yet the same as yesterday’s bonnet. I suggested, if she really wants to be on this jury, she’d better lose the chapeau. Just another practical application of my sales savvy.

Because they are going to interview jurors one at a time.

There’s a questionnaire. Before said interrogation, fifty-seven (57) questions across eighteen (18) pages.

Nobody said anything about a test.

The Hat Lady – prospective juror number fourteen (#14) – can’t figure out how she’s supposed to answer these questions. Yes or no. That’s just silly. So, she handled many responses with brief essays. Told her to put her hat back on.

Kinda wished I had a hat myself. She wasn’t wrong. Are the laws of the USA or of any state too lenient? Too harsh? Should the laws of the USA or of any state be changed? Yes or no.

The mind boggles. 1. I don’t know the laws. 3. I don’t know how they’re enforced. 2. I don’t know why they exist. 4. If I did know, it’d be a judgement call on my part, a judgement I’m not about to share with the Multnomah County Court System.

One question asked which three television shows are my favorites. I was tempted to put down People’s Court, Perry Mason and L.A. Law. But I didn’t. I told the truth. The 700 Club, Masterpiece Theatre and Wall Street Report.

Thirty minutes later. Miss Austin, the Clerk, finally pokes her head in. Just her head. She counts heads. I don’t like where this is heading. Let’s us know to no one’s surprise, there will be a delay. “There’s a lot of preparation for a case like this.” There’s a lot of waiting, too.

10:45 a.m. Another clerk comes in and announces it’s time to get grilled. Love an early lunch.

Called at random, nobody asks if I’m in my second decade of academic probation from Willamette School of Law and I am somehow seated. Juror Number Nine. The Big Nine. Niner niner. 009.

Barely sworn in, right hand not fully back to my side, Judge Gallagher announces Mr. Dixon and The State have agreed to a stipulation. Kinda hoped I’d be locked in a downtown hotel for a few weeks dining on room service paid for by anybody else.

The jury may ask questions.

“This is just a legal formality, right?”

That garnered a smile from the District Attorney.

“As I understand it, then we should be out of here this afternoon?”

Another smile from the D.A.

“You understand exactly.” D.A. Horner concedes, “It’s an unusual proceeding, but we’re legally bound to do so.” Basically, the jury is a rubber stamp, perhaps to preempt appeals to higher courts. Dotting the tees, crossing the eyes.

I didn’t send a guilty man to Death Row.

When Carl Lee Dixon was brought in the courtroom, I swear the ambient temperature dropped palpably. Like some frozen demon. He wasn’t black, he was grey. Ashen. Still gives me the chills. A slender man, he looked like he could kill us all and not give a shit.

The stipulation was less than two pages long. Said something like this. From Dixon Parole Board hearing twenty-six (26) years later.In 1987, petitioner was drinking at a tavern. Petitioner recounted that, after several patrons left the bar, he engaged in an argument with the victim, the bartender, about whether petitioner also had to leave. Petitioner then followed the victim behind the bar, the victim kicked petitioner in the leg, and, in response, petitioner stabbed the victim with a pair of scissors. After stabbing the victim, petitioner then took money from the register and left the tavern. The victim later died from a stab wound to the heart. According to petitioner, he turned himself in to the police but initially denied committing the murder, blaming the stabbing on an unnamed accomplice. Petitioner later entered a guilty plea and was convicted of one count of aggravated murder. At the time of the murder, petitioner was 33 years old and was on parole in California for robbery.

And here’s some info we weren’t given.

Regarding petitioner’s criminal history and conduct on parole, criteria in OAR 255–032–0020(6) and (7), the board had evidence that, over a period of 18 years before he murdered the victim and robbed the victim and the bar, petitioner had engaged in a pattern of committing theft, robbery, armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, and burglary offenses, some of which he had committed during periods of probation or parole. The board found that, at the time of the murder, petitioner was unable to foresee the consequences of his criminal conduct, despite his multiple incarcerations, and his criminal record was “persuasive evidence” that he was not capable of rehabilitation.

Judge tells us he has “painstakingly determined” Mr. Dixon understands all this legal mumbo-jumbo – I’m paraphrasing here – and besides, it’s voluntary. No promises, except the state will not seek the death penalty.

Good for Carl Lee, ’cause I was feeling some smoking mirrors. Basically, we were sworn to agree Mr. Dixon was guilty and we wouldn’t give him the needle. “Proof beyond a reasonable doubt” means taking everybody’s word for the truth, including the defendant.

Both sides, judge and jury, too, agree – guilt is a fact.

“Will my briefcase be safe here? I asked as I left the courtroom to deliberate the preordained.