The Oklahoma City Bombing Jury Selection Transcripts
Thursday, April 3, 1997 (morning)
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Criminal Action No. 96-CR-68
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TIMOTHY JAMES McVEIGH,
Defendant.
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT
(Trial to Jury - Volume 11)
Proceedings before the HONORABLE RICHARD P. MATSCH,
Judge, United States District Court for the District of
Colorado, commencing at 9:10 a.m., on the 3rd day of April,
1997, in Courtroom C-204, United States Courthouse, Denver,
Colorado.
Proceeding Recorded by Mechanical Stenography, Transcription
Produced via Computer by Paul Zuckerman, 1929 Stout Street,
P.O. Box 3563, Denver, Colorado, 80294, (303) 629-9285
APPEARANCES
PATRICK M. RYAN, United States Attorney for the
Western District of Oklahoma, 210 West Park Avenue, Suite 400,
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73102, appearing for the plaintiff.
JOSEPH H. HARTZLER, SEAN CONNELLY, LARRY A. MACKEY,
BETH WILKINSON, SCOTT MENDELOFF, JAMIE ORENSTEIN, AITAN
GOELMAN, and VICKI BEHENNA, Special Attorneys to the U.S.
Attorney General, 1961 Stout Street, Suite 1200, Denver,
Colorado, 80294, appearing for the plaintiff.
STEPHEN JONES, ROBERT NIGH, JR., and RICHARD BURR,
Attorneys at Law, Jones, Wyatt & Roberts, 999 18th Street,
Suite 2460, Denver, Colorado, 80202; JERALYN MERRITT, 303 East
17th Avenue, Suite 400, Denver, Colorado, 80203; MANDY WELCH,
Attorney at Law, 412 Main, Suite 1150, Houston, Texas, 77002;
CHERYL A. RAMSEY, Attorney at Law, Szlichta and Ramsey, 8 Main
Place, Post Office Box 1206, Stillwater, Oklahoma, 74076; and
CHRISTOPHER L. TRITICO, Attorney at Law, Essmyer, Tritico &
Clary, 4300 Scotland, Houston, Texas, 77007, appearing for
Defendant McVeigh.
* * * * *
PROCEEDINGS
(Reconvened at 9:10 a.m.)
THE COURT: Good morning.
(Juror No. 552 was recalled.)
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
BY THE COURT:
Q. We're sorry to keep you waiting even longer this morning
after this morning, but there were some other matters that had
to be attended to.
Did you -- were you able to talk with your mother?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And what answer did you get?
A. It wasn't agreeable with my husband.
Q. All right. And I guess we won't inquire further with
respect to that.
Did you also talk to your husband about his travel
schedule some more?
A. He doesn't have specific dates that he goes out of town.
They just come up.
Q. You mentioned that yesterday, and I haven't forgotten that;
but it's a matter of how soon -- I mean, how much notice does
he get? Surely he gets some notice before he has to take --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. About what an interval is there? Is it a matter of a
couple of weeks?
A. Sometimes it's a week. Sometimes it's a couple of weeks.
It depends what it is he has to do.
Q. Uh-huh.
A. We try to work -- when he does go out of town, we do try to
work on my days off so it isn't so much of a conflict with me,
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
also.
Q. To the extent that he can control it, he does it that way?
A. To some degree. Not always.
Q. Well, have you talked about other alternatives that might
be available for your child care?
A. No, I haven't. I imagine if I happen to be chosen, I will
have to work something out.
Q. We might be able to assist you in some fashion with that,
too. I wouldn't exclude that possibility.
A. Okay. I'm not using it as an excuse to get out.
Q. No one is suggesting that.
A. I'm really not. I'm really concerned about my children.
Q. Of course; and that is a matter that is a great concern,
and I don't want you to think I'm being hard-hearted about it
and ignoring the importance of child care, either. Certainly
that's part of what we rely on for the social order in this
country, just as we do for jury service. We're just trying to
see whether there can be an accommodation. But let me ask you
some additional questions then --
A. Okay.
Q. -- about the possibility of your service with us in
connection with this case.
And you recall, of course, completing the
questionnaire. I mean, not only the first one where you
mentioned these two things about your difficulties with your
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
employment and child care, but the full questionnaire? And
you've already told us in talking about the care of your
children that you live in Greeley?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And as I understand, you were born in a -- in Indiana?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you -- let's see. Did you -- did you grow up in
Arizona then?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Nogales?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. That's where you went to high school, and then you went to
the University of Tucson?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And nursing was your academic training?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you have been practicing your profession, what, since
you got out of college?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And when did you come to Colorado to live?
A. October 1994.
Q. And that was from?
A. Phoenix.
Q. Phoenix. Okay.
And what -- what brought you to Greeley?
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
A. My husband's employment.
Q. All right. And his work is what?
A. He's the western hemisphere manager for Con-Agra
Refrigerated Foods International.
Q. You already told us that he manages sales and marketing
effort in Canada -- and I can't remember all.
A. Mexico, South America, Central America and the Carribean.
Q. Okay. And the company products I assume are distributed
broadly?
A. Distributed -- excuse me?
Q. Distributed broadly in those countries?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You -- have you ever been on a jury before?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And I'm looking for that myself.
A. It was in Phoenix.
Q. In Phoenix; right.
And that was how long ago?
A. About four years ago.
Q. I'm trying to find that in the questionnaire.
MR. TRITICO: Question 114.
THE COURT: Thank you.
BY THE COURT:
Q. Excuse me for just a moment while I turn to that page. And
that was really an assault on a police officer?
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did the -- you've described what the case was about. Was
the police officer injured?
A. No.
Q. And the jury returned a guilty verdict?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you had any other jury experience?
A. I've been called for jury duty but never been seated on a
trial.
Q. You were called up in Weld County?
A. No, sir.
Q. Now, your association with the Fraternal Order of Police
was simply responding to solicitations to support charitable
events?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Okay. In connection with your education, your training and
academic preparation for nursing, I assume you had some
chemistry?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And would you describe your exposure to that discipline as
being essentially a general one, background necessary for
understanding for your profession?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many chemistry courses would you say?
A. I think I had a year of -- in organic chemistry, and that
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
was all.
Q. That was it. Okay.
And in the practice of your profession, we know that
you're on this cardiac team now. Have you had a specialty all
along in nursing?
A. Not necessarily. I've done cardiac before, but I have
never worked in an institution that had individual groups that
would be specialized.
Q. What other fields of nursing have you worked in?
A. I've only worked in the operating room.
Q. And you did that in Phoenix?
A. In Tucson, also.
Q. And Tucson.
A. And Boulder.
Q. Pardon me?
A. And Boulder. When we moved here, I could not get a job in
Greeley and I worked in Boulder.
Q. And were you at Boulder Community Hospital?
A. Yes, for about nine months.
Q. Okay. Now, we put some questions to you on the subject of
the death penalty, and these are on page 27, if you want to
just turn to that and refresh yourself as to what the questions
were and what your answers were. Do you see that?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Okay. Now, in seeing these questions on this
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
questionnaire, is that the first that you have really thought
seriously about the death penalty?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And we put these questions to you in the very broadest of
terms, asking you, essentially: If you could write the law,
what would it be? How would you write the law?
Now, I want to talk about it a little more
specifically; and the reason why, of course, we've approached
the death penalty in the questionnaire and must do so now in a
little sharper focus is because the case we have to try
includes charges which, if convicted, carry the possibility of
that penalty. Understand?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, I think I should explain to you what the procedures
are that lead to that kind of a decision by the jury. In --
in -- I'm speaking now about federal court, because there's a
difference in Colorado between the federal court practice and
the state court.
In all criminal cases, of course, the jury must decide
whether the evidence presented at the trial proves all of the
essential elements of the crime charged, and those essential
elements are given -- what they are, are given in the
instructions of the Court at the conclusion of the trial. And
then, if all of the jurors are convinced beyond a reasonable
doubt that a defendant has been proved guilty, they return a
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
guilty verdict; and then in noncapital cases, the jury is
discharged its duty and the jurors go home and then it's up to
the judge to decide what the sentence ought to be. And before
making that decision, there's an additional inquiry into the
circumstances of the crime, and also information is gathered
about the defendant as an individual human being, his life
history, his employment experience, family relationships, all
of those things that come together and make each one of us
unique; and there is another hearing, and the sentencing judge
decides upon the punishment that is appropriate for that
particular person.
Now, in federal court when there's the possibility of
a death sentence, it is a different procedure. Under federal
law, the jury must decide what punishment the defendant
deserves and make the choice on the options of death, life
imprisonment without the possibility of ever being released or
any lesser sentence that is provided by law.
Before making that choice, the jury, just like the
judge in other kinds of cases, must consider additional
information about the crime and about the uniqueness of the
defendant as an individual human being. Now, that additional
information is given to the jury at a second hearing, and that
hearing proceeds much like the trial itself in that counsel for
the Government present information that they believe support a
death sentence, and we call that kind of information
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
aggravating circumstances. And then the defendant -- counsel
for the defendant presents information to be considered in
deciding that death is not deserved, and that's referred to
generally as mitigating circumstances.
What the jury then must do is make what amounts to a
moral judgment as to the defendant, and in this case Timothy
McVeigh, and decide whether he should live or die.
Now, just as with the question of guilt, the law says
and requires that the jurors must approach this task of
deciding the penalty with open minds and be guided by what they
hear and see in court. They must not allow themselves to be
controlled by any preconceived notions that they might have
about the facts and the law, and each juror must make an
independent decision, free from the influence of any opinions
that might be publicly expressed by others and in accordance
with the facts and the law that are presented. Any personal
disagreement that a juror may have with respect to the
controlling law must be set aside.
Have you followed me on this explanation?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, with this in mind, I want to ask you now a question
and it is as a general matter and without considering anything
about the evidence -- what the evidence may show the facts of
this case to be, because we don't have the evidence. Do you
have a personal or moral or religious view either against or in
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
favor of the death penalty?
A. I generally favor the death penalty.
Q. And we need to explore that a little and determine -- and
you are the one who has to determine this, whether your view
generally concerning capital punishment would prevent or
substantially interfere with your ability, if you served on
this jury, to decide a sentence for a defendant found guilty.
A. Okay.
Q. Well, you know, I think what it -- what I'm trying to find
out is whether you would be able to follow my instructions at
that time after a penalty phase hearing and give fair and
impartial consideration to all of the facts and circumstances
about the case and about Timothy McVeigh before deciding what
sentence -- what his sentence should be, if he's found guilty;
and those instructions would include the particular aggravating
and mitigating circumstances that the jury can consider based
on the evidence that's presented.
A. I think I would be able to do that.
THE COURT: Okay. The lawyers have some questions for
you. They have the opportunity to ask some additional
questions. Thank you.
Mr. Mackey?
MR. MACKEY: Thank you, your Honor.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY MR. MACKEY:
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
Q. Good morning, ma'am.
A. Good morning.
Q. It was yesterday that I was introduced to you, so let me do
that again. My name is Larry Mackey; and with my fellow
prosecutors, it's my privilege to represent the United States
in this particular prosecution.
I noted that you had travel plans starting tomorrow.
A. Saturday.
Q. Saturday. Okay.
And don't tease me with the possibilities; but with a
spouse who travels the western hemisphere, do you get to go to
some pretty nice places?
A. Not very often. This is the second time I've been
somewhere with him. He's going on business and I'm going with
him.
Q. Well, enjoy the trip.
A. Thank you.
Q. You have four sons?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. All right. Do they play sports?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What kind of sports?
A. Basketball.
Q. So if you are born in Indiana, you got four boys who play
basketball and you went to the University of Arizona, what were
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
you doing Monday night?
A. I was working until eight o'clock and I saw the second
half.
Q. We lost them the first round. I'm from Indiana, but I'm
prepared to congratulate you.
You also came from a family with four brothers?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I'm curious, as a parent, did it help having four brothers
to raise four sons?
A. Probably. I helped to raise my brothers, also, because my
father was killed when I was nine years old.
Q. Oh, my goodness.
A. And I was the oldest.
Q. Okay. How close in age were your brothers?
A. Brothers?
Q. Yeah, to you.
A. I have a brother that's one year younger than me, another
brother that's four years younger, and another one that's five
years younger and another one that's nine years younger.
Q. I note from the brief bio we have here they've all done
well in life.
A. Uh-huh.
Q. You should, I imagine, take some pride in that.
A. My mother should since she raised us all by herself.
Q. And if she were here, she would say that you helped out.
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
I notice that your next youngest brother is a doctor.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, when a nurse sister gets together with a doctor
brother, what do they talk about?
A. We talk about medicine sometimes, but we have similar
interests. He enjoys skiing and I enjoy skiing. His wife is a
nurse, also.
Q. So even though you've been in Colorado a couple of years or
so, you're not kicking and screaming to go back home; there's
some mountains up the road.
A. Actually --
Q. I've not made the travel from downtown Denver to Greeley.
How long a distance is that?
A. To our meeting place, it's 52 miles for me.
Q. So if you were released from court at about five o'clock in
the evenings, about what time might you be home with your
family?
A. Yesterday evening I got home after 6:30.
Q. Is that right?
All right. I notice in your questionnaire that either
you or someone in your family have once been employed by TV or
a radio station. Was that you?
A. It was a brother of mine.
Q. And I notice that you spend some of your limited leisure
time watching E.R.
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You know what my next question is going to be?
A. I don't know.
Q. What's a nurse think about a show like that?
A. Well, most nurses don't watch it, but I found it
interesting. It's starting to get boring now, but I guess I've
gotten into interpersonal relationships in the series.
Q. Well, having worked in operating rooms your professional
career, is that slice of life that's presented in that TV show
mirror your own experience?
A. E.R. is a whole different area, really.
Q. Okay. One of the questions that was addressed to you,
among the many in the questionnaire, had to do with
eyewitnesses. Do you recall that question in your
questionnaire?
A. No.
Q. Look at page 25, if you wouldn't mind.
A. Which question?
Q. It's Question 111 on that page, 25.
A. Okay.
Q. And your answer was -- your personal view is: That kind of
testimony is fairly reliable and in many cases the police
sketches are almost identical to the real person.
Have you had some experience where you came to that
conclusion that persons can see an episode and recount it in a
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
way that's captured in a police sketch?
A. Not personally, just by what I've seen, like on television,
and certain people they've shown the sketch and the person was
found to be that person and they're very similar.
Q. In the case that I was curious that you served as a juror
in Arizona, was there eyewitness testimony?
A. I don't recall, it's been so long.
Q. Was it a long trial?
A. No, it was two or three days.
Q. Okay. And were deliberations long -- how long?
A. The jury deliberation?
Q. Yes.
A. No.
Q. On the same page, page 25, at Question 117.
A. Uh-huh.
Q. It's a question concerning testimony that would come
through the person of one associated with the defendant on
trial, an accomplice is the common term used. Tell me again
about your views about that kind of testimony.
A. If the information that he has is credible, I think that
their -- they should be able to use the information.
Q. What process would you go about in assessing the
credibility of the accomplice or insider testimony?
A. The background that was given about the person, whatever we
were given.
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
Q. And would you look in the context of all the evidence to
see whether it supported or undermined that testimony?
A. (Juror nods head.)
Q. All right. We need to ask you, of course, some questions
about your exposure to the publicity of this particular case;
and I've read your questionnaire. Give me an idea of your
earliest memories of the Oklahoma City bombing when you first
learned about it and what impressions remain with you today.
A. I learned about it as soon as it was broadcast on
television. I happened to be watching television at the time
that the first news breaks came on, and I remember watching it
for, oh, two to three hours because I couldn't believe the
devastation. The impressions that I remember, being a medical
personnel, is all the nurses and doctors that were running in
the street treating the victims and wondering, you know, how
the hospitals were going to be able to handle the devastation.
Q. So it struck a personal chord because of your own career in
that field?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is there anything about your experience as a professional
nurse and about the prospect that rescuers from Oklahoma might
testify in this case that would cause you to be particularly in
favor of the Government's presentation, or could you listen to
that testimony in a neutral and open-minded fashion?
A. I feel I could still listen to it with a neutral --
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
open-minded fashion.
Q. Since your early exposure to the publicity in the case,
have you followed the developments in the legal system?
A. Since when?
Q. Since -- since April 19th, 1995, since the time of the
bombing.
A. Not with any great interest. If it happened to be in the
paper, I would read it, but not -- it just depended if it
caught my interest or not.
Q. As a general matter, have you found it interesting to
follow criminal prosecutions?
A. No, not necessarily.
Q. And in this particular case I note in your questionnaire
that as you sit -- or as you wrote the questionnaire, rather,
that you had no opinion about this particular defendant.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does that remain your position today?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. One of the questions addressed to you in the questionnaire
had to do with your ability and inclination to follow the
Court's instructions, and you answered that you agree strongly.
Tell me a little bit about your sense of obligation to follow
the rules of the court as defined by the Court?
A. I feel that I'm a truthful and honest person, and I will do
what I know how to the best of my ability according to the
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
Court.
Q. And do you recognize the expertise that his Honor has in
the rules of law inside of the courtroom?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you would listen to those instructions on any level at
any stage of the proceedings?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. One of the questions also had to do with Waco and the
events in Waco, Texas. Do you recall those questions?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Tell me a little bit about your recall of that event and
how that might have influenced you today.
A. All I recall is the fact that they were hold up in the
compound and the final event that happened when they burned
themselves down.
Q. And if the name Waco comes up during the course of this
trial, is there anything about your past exposure with that
event that might influence you in this particular case?
A. No.
Q. Let me ask you a few questions -- additional questions
about your views on the death penalty.
A. Okay.
Q. In the course of your career as a nurse, have you lost
patients?
A. Yes, sir.
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
Q. Tell me a little bit about what it's like to be in a field
where you experience the loss of life.
A. Fortunately, it doesn't happen too often in the operating
room. It depends on the situation of what kind of person -- I
mean, if it's a young person that died from trauma, meaning
from a car accident, it affects me personally; but if, like,
it's somebody who -- or if it's someone, like, we've worked on
all day and tried to keep them alive and then they die, that
will affect me also because you get -- you think -- you've put
your whole heart into it to try to save their life and you
can't.
But generally, if it's -- I mean, it's something that
I just have to deal with being a nurse.
Q. In your career, have you had the occasion where you had to
treat a person who was the victim of a criminal act as opposed
to an accident?
A. Not that I can recall right now.
Q. And of course you recognize that the realm that you've been
living your world in is much different than the criminal case
where the prospect of the death penalty exists?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. And that what the law would allow and what the jury must
decide in a capital case -- not this one -- is whether a person
lives or dies; do you understand that?
A. (Juror nods head.)
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
Q. Is there anything about your experience as a nurse and the
experiences you've alluded to here that bleeds into your
ability to, as a juror, listen to the evidence, follow the
Court's instructions and come to your own moral sense of life
or death?
A. I don't believe so.
Q. As you sit there now, is it your pledge that if selected as
a juror, you would listen to all of the evidence presented by
either side and follow, in strict fashion, the Court's
instructions?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. Let me conclude and just ask a few more questions about
your family situation because I know that's important to you.
Your oldest son is 15?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is he the mark of maturity? I've got a 16 year old, that's
why I'm curious.
A. At times.
Q. Okay. With some encouragement from you and your husband,
might he help out in this -- in the prospect of supporting the
family in your absence?
A. He already does.
Q. All right. Thanks so much for your time this morning. I'm
sorry you had to come back a second time, but it's been very
instructive and very helpful -- third time. Third time is a
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
charm. Again, it's true.
THE COURT: Mr. Tritico?
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY MR. TRITICO:
Q. Good morning. My name is Christopher Tritico, as the Judge
informed you yesterday, and I'm one of the lawyers who has the
honor of representing Timothy McVeigh in this case. I have
just a few questions for you, and I'm going to try not to take
up a lot of your time today because I know you've been waiting
quite patiently for a few days to talk; and I have to give
Mr. Mackey credit for taking my E.R. joke.
I do have to ask you one question about your watching
E.R. Does everybody get normal saline with D5W or is that just
television?
A. That's just television.
Q. Okay. You mentioned a moment ago that your father died
when you were very young, and I thought I understood you to say
that your father was killed.
I have to ask you -- I know this is quite personal --
but was your father killed in some sort of a criminal act or
accident?
A. It was a freak car accident.
Q. In your education and your nursing education -- I'm sorry,
I don't recall what college you went to, but you have a
Bachelor of Science degree in nursing; is that correct?
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Pardon me. During your college career, did you take
classes in laboratory science?
A. As -- like, for example?
Q. Well, as a nurse, go through the lab and learn how the lab
works and operates and how it operates and things like that?
A. I had a chemistry lab.
Q. During the time that you were in the chemistry lab, did you
learn about laboratory procedures and keeping it clean, clear
of contamination and things along those lines?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Yes?
I'm not arguing with you. If you don't answer, she
can't take that down. Okay?
A. That's okay.
Q. Tell me what you recall about issues regarding lab
cleanliness and contamination issues.
A. You know, it's been over 20 years, sir.
Q. I understand that.
A. I just remember that if you contaminate one ingredient with
another, then probably the experiment would not happen.
Q. And if I understand you correctly, if you contaminate one
area, then the experiment might not be valid?
A. Right.
Q. Do you know why it's important to keep a lab clean and
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
clear of contamination?
A. So that it doesn't get confused.
Q. Do you feel as a health care professional that if you found
that the results that you were reading -- I'm assuming that as
a health care professional from time to time you have occasion
to read and review results from the lab of the hospital; is
that correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. If you found that the lab was performing tests and the lab
had been contaminated, how would you treat that test result?
MR. RYAN: Your Honor, I object.
THE COURT: Sustained.
BY MR. TRITICO:
Q. Now, we've gone over -- Judge Matsch -- and Mr. Mackey has
gone over quite extensively with you -- excuse me. I'm
terribly sorry -- your personal situation, and I don't intend
to belabor the point but I do have a few questions about it,
ma'am, if I may.
This case has been estimated to have as many as 500
witnesses and could last several months. I can't tell you how
long it will last or how many witnesses will be called, but
that's been the estimates. With the situation that you've
discussed with your children -- and I clearly respect that your
15 year old is old enough to assist. You seem like the type of
parent to be extremely concerned about the health, safety and
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
welfare of your children, and that's been your primary concern,
as you discussed with Judge Matsch today and yesterday.
My concern is that in a trial of this length and
magnitude, are your concerns for your children going to
override your ability to sit and listen to the evidence and the
witnesses and the testimony that comes into this case?
A. They could if I knew they weren't properly being taken care
of.
Q. Is that concern so great that it causes you concern that
you won't be the type of fair and impartial juror that we're
looking for in any case?
A. If my children are to a point where I know that they aren't
safe and being taken care of, I could be sitting here and not
paying attention like I should be because I would probably be
thinking about them.
Q. How do you feel about that?
A. I think that would make me not be as attentive as I should
be.
Q. And we won't know today, as we complete this voir dire
examination of you, if those concerns of yours will be erased
prior to trial; is that a fair statement?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. I noticed in your questionnaire -- and I believe Judge
Matsch asked you earlier, if -- that you had served on a jury
in Arizona; is that right?
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
A. (Juror nods head.)
Q. Yes?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How do you examine the criminal justice system differently
after your experience as a juror?
A. I don't -- I don't know that I examine it any differently.
I just -- I seem to have more of an insight into it by serving
on a jury.
Q. Has that experience changed your focus on the criminal
justice system?
A. No.
Q. I noticed that you answered one of the questions in the
questionnaire that some people seem to slip through the cracks
when you were referring to the criminal justice system. Do you
recall that?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Did you have anybody in mind when you made that statement?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. What is it that causes you to believe that people seem to
fall through the cracks in the criminal justice system?
A. Well, maybe the case isn't presented and the evidence isn't
presented in the manner that it should be so that the person is
found guilty of the charge.
Q. Okay. I'm -- I got confused. I want to back up a little
bit and explore that a little more, if you don't mind.
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
If I understood, what you just told me was that if the
evidence was not presented properly, the person might get
convicted inappropriately. Is that a fair recitation of what
you said?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How does that relate to people slipping through the cracks
of the criminal justice system?
A. If the evidence isn't presented appropriately, then the
jury may see the person in a -- with a different view and find
him not guilty and get off when in real truth that he is really
guilty.
Q. Have you experienced a situation in your life or seen a
case that's been publicized or whatever that you felt that that
happened?
A. Not that I -- you know, that I'm close enough to the
evidence and everything that, you know -- you know, it happened
to occur during the case.
Q. Now, I also noticed from your questionnaire that you were a
victim of a robbery.
A. Uh-huh.
Q. How long ago was that?
A. Seven years ago.
Q. Was that in Arizona?
A. Uh-huh. In Tucson.
Q. I'm sorry?
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
A. In Tucson.
Q. Tucson?
I believe, if I recall correctly, no one was
apprehended in that robbery.
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you report that to the police?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What happened to you?
A. What happened to me?
Q. Yes.
A. I was at work and I came home and my house had been broken
into and everything that was valuable had been stolen.
Q. This was not a robbery where someone came up and took your
purse?
A. No.
Q. This was a burglary of your home?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You never saw the individual who burglarized your home?
A. (Juror nods head.)
Q. No?
A. No.
Q. Has that changed your opinions and feeling about the
criminal justice system and -- the criminal justice system?
A. No.
Q. Was that experience before or after your jury service on
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
the aggravated assault on a peace officer?
A. Before.
Q. Before?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Now, regarding your -- your discussing eyewitness
testimony, Question 111 in your questionnaire there, you stated
that: It's fairly reliable. In many cases police sketches are
almost identical to the real person; is that correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you have any particular sketches in mind when you wrote
that down?
A. No.
Q. Did you have occasion to view the sketches that were
released by the Federal Bureau of Investigations with respect
to the investigation into this case?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And have you made any -- any conclusions before you came
here today and before you filled out the questionnaire about
those sketches?
MR. RYAN: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained. You're asking about specific
matters in the case.
MR. TRITICO: May I respond?
THE COURT: No. I sustained the objection.
BY MR. TRITICO:
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
Q. Now, with respect to accomplice testimony, if I -- 117 in
your questionnaire, you stated that if the accomplice has
credible information for the prosecution it should be done as
long as a just sentence is still given.
When you wrote the statement "as long as a just
sentence is still given," were you referring to -- to whom were
you referring is my question.
A. The witness that would give --
Q. To the accomplice, the witness?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Would your opinion of the credibility of that accomplice
witness change if you, as a juror, did not know what the
sentence was that he received?
A. No.
Q. How would you -- if I understand, what you are writing here
and what we're discussing here is that that would be one of the
factors that you would use in determining the credibility of
the evidence that the person gave; is that fair?
A. I didn't understand what you're asking me.
Q. I don't blame you. I don't think I understood, either.
If I understood what you're talking about here and
what you wrote down, the sentence that that person received --
accomplice witness received would be one of the factors you
would use in judging the credibility of the evidence he gave in
court?
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
A. No, it wouldn't.
Q. Okay. Now, you also stated on Question 118 that you would
consider his testimony with skepti -- skep -- skepticism, great
care and caution. Tell me why you feel that you would view
that testimony in that fashion.
A. It would depend on the witness's background and the
information that we had in regards to the witness.
Q. Is there anything about the fact -- about the way that that
witness's testimony was -- was arrived at or about -- or how
the Government got the testimony that would cause you to give
that any more skepticism, care and caution?
A. Do you think we would be given that information?
Q. I can't tell you that, ma'am. I just want to know if --
A. I don't think so.
Q. Okay. Now, you were asked some questions in the
questionnaire -- I'm sorry. I know you don't have any water
and I'm drinking it, but I'm trying not to cough throughout
this.
You were asked some questions about your beliefs on
the Constitution, and you wrote that people are entitled -- I'm
paraphrasing now. Please correct me if I'm wrong -- people are
entitled to their own political and religious opinions as long
as it doesn't hurt anyone.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Can you explain that a little further to me, how the
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
political and religious opinions -- how could it hurt someone,
the opinion?
A. I guess the opinion couldn't hurt somebody, but whatever --
I guess I was referring to maybe the consequences of it.
Q. The consequences of the opinion?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Do you have anything in particular in mind when you make
that statement? I'm sorry.
A. No, I didn't.
Q. Now, I want to ask you a couple of questions about: You
wrote about the O. J. Simpson case in there in your
questionnaire, and you wrote something that I thought was very
interesting, and that's at Question 142 and 143, ma'am. You
said at Question 142 -- that's on page 33 by the way.
A. Uh-huh.
Q. -- I feel the defense handled the case poorly in the
criminal trial in that race was used to get O. J. off.
Now, I'm a criminal defense lawyer and, as I recall,
that case was not guilty and I was just kind of thinking that
they might have done a pretty good job. Can you explain to me
why you think the defense presented that case poorly?
A. I felt like they brought race into the trial to get him off
because the jury was predominantly black.
Q. Do -- do you have an objection to the fact that race came
into the case?
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
A. Yes, I do.
Q. I'm sorry?
A. I do because I don't feel it was part of the case.
Q. How closely did you watch the case?
A. Not real closely.
Q. Okay. And that brings me to a question about your opinion
about the Branch Davidians at Waco. If I understood you a
moment ago when Mr. Mackey asked you about that -- and I think
I got this down -- what you said was they were hold up in their
compound and they burned themselves down. Is that correct?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. How did you arrive at the decision that the Branch
Davidians were the ones who burned the compound down?
A. It seems that that's what I recall hearing on the news.
Q. Do you recall from whom you heard it?
A. No. Specifically you mean like what television station?
Q. Oh, absolutely not. What I meant was do you know who
sponsored that information? Was it the government, somebody
else?
A. I don't recall.
Q. Okay. Do you feel that there could have been other answers
to how the place burned down?
A. Besides them setting themselves on fire?
Q. Yes, ma'am.
A. There could have been.
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
Q. Okay. Now, with respect to the publicity that you have
seen regarding this case, if I understood you correctly earlier
you were watching TV when the first broadcast interrupted the
television show that you were watching and you watched it for
approximately two or three hours; is that correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, aside from what you've already told us about the
devastation you saw and you were wondering how the hospitals
were going to handle that, can you tell me what you recall --
what you remember seeing on the television that day those two
or three hours.
A. Just basically the devastation or people running everywhere
trying to find survivors.
Q. How did that make you feel?
A. Sympathetic for the people that it happened to.
Q. For the people that it happened to?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Did you watch the news coverage -- I understood you to say
earlier you didn't watch it religiously after that first day,
but you did watch news coverage over the next few days; is that
fair?
A. Yes.
Q. And as you saw the events unfold how did you feel about
what you were seeing on the television and reading in the paper
every day about the victims and the people and the things that
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
they were showing on TV?
A. It was just like disbelief, just like I couldn't believe
that it really had happened.
Q. Did you see the reports on the television the few days
later that an arrest had been made?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How did you feel when you saw that?
A. I couldn't believe they had arrested somebody already.
Q. Did you follow -- did you see the -- the report at the time
that it happened or a later broadcast? Was it live or was it
Memorex, I guess is my question?
A. I think it was later.
Q. Did you, at that time, at the moment that you saw the
report of the arrest, Mr. McVeigh walking out of the
courthouse, did you form any opinions about Mr. McVeigh at that
time?
A. No.
Q. What's the last report that you recall seeing on television
about this?
A. You mean just recently or at that time or?
Q. No, the last one you recall seeing.
A. I can't -- I just can't remember right now.
Q. Have you heard or seen any reports about anything that
Mr. McVeigh may have stated to his lawyers?
A. Yes, sir.
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
Q. And what do you recall about that?
A. I recall that the newspaper in Dallas got ahold of
information that said he had confessed to doing it.
Q. Did you see that on the TV or read that -- I believe you
read the Denver Post; is that right?
A. I think I saw it in the newspaper.
Q. In the Denver Post?
A. (Juror nods head.)
Q. Did -- did you read the whole article?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did you think when you read that?
A. Whether it was credible or not.
Q. And how do you feel now?
A. Same.
Q. Have you formed an opinion about the credibility of the
story that you read in the Denver Post?
A. No.
Q. Now, I believe you also read a couple of magazines probably
neither of which have any reports of this, Ladies Home Journal
and Men's Fitness?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I'm certain that you take Men's Fitness solely for the
articles that are contained therein?
A. It's my husband's magazine.
Q. Okay. Now, with respect to the death penalty -- and I'm
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
almost through taking up your time -- you generally favor the
death penalty was your statement to Mr. Mackey; is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And on the questionnaire you -- you check the box that said
basically the same thing, that you favor the death penalty in
most instances or something like that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is that fair?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And I'm talking to you about this, ma'am, not because I
want you to feel that if you're one of the 12 chosen to sit in
judgment on Mr. McVeigh that I am in any way indicating that
we're going to get to the punishment phase of this trial;
however, Judge Matsch and the law will not allow me to ask you
questions again so I need to get your opinions and feelings
about the death penalty now. Okay?
A. (Juror nods head.)
Q. Yes?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Okay. You stated in your questionnaire that the death
penalty, in your definition, is used for heinous crimes
committed; is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How do you define a heinous crime?
A. A violent crime where somebody was killed violently.
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
Q. One enough?
A. One?
Q. One killing enough?
A. Yes.
MR. RYAN: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained.
BY MR. TRITICO:
Q. And Judge Matsch told you about the law of aggravation and
the law of mitigation, and he discussed that with you. My
question for you, ma'am, if you were chosen to serve on this
jury, using your definition of when the death penalty is
appropriate and a conviction occurred, would you automatically
impose the death penalty without regard to any other facts?
MR. RYAN: Same objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained. I've been sustaining that
question all along. I don't understand why it keeps coming up.
MR. TRITICO: May I have a moment, Judge?
THE COURT: Yes.
BY MR. TRITICO:
Q. Ma'am, I have just a couple more questions for you. I
talked to you a moment ago about your reading the report of the
confession, if you're chosen to serve on this jury, how will
you put that out of your mind if you hear no evidence about it
at trial?
MR. RYAN: Your Honor, I object again.
Juror No. 552 - Voir Dire
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. TRITICO: I thank you, ma'am.
THE COURT: You're excused now.
You're going to leave Saturday, did you say?
JUROR: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: We will try to expedite consideration of
the question on whether to excuse you because of these matters
we've talked about with respect to your child care situation
and try to get back to you on that tomorrow.
JUROR: Okay.
THE COURT: Now -- and I'm not telling you you are
going to be excused, it's something I have to discuss with the
lawyers.
JUROR: Okay.
THE COURT: But I know that it would be something on
your mind while you're on vacation or on the trip so that's why
I'll try to get you an answer by tomorrow.
JUROR: I'd appreciate it.
THE COURT: Will you be at work tomorrow?
JUROR: No, I'm off tomorrow.
THE COURT: Okay. So you can be reached in the --
JUROR: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Of course now you have to assume that
you're going to be on the jury.
JUROR: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And have the responsibility, so please
continue to be careful about what you read, see and hear and
avoid discussion about the case with anybody.
JUROR: Okay.
THE COURT: You can go back home now.
JUROR: Thank you.
THE COURT: And we'll have 609.
If you'll just raise your right hand and take the oath
from the clerk here.
(Juror No. 609 was sworn.)
COURTROOM DEPUTY: Thank you. Have a seat, please.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY THE COURT:
Q. Under our procedure we're going to refer to you by a
number, No. 609, instead of by your name, so please excuse
that; but I'm sure you understand there are reasons for doing
it that way.
Now, you previously came to the Jefferson County
Fairgrounds on March the 19th and at that time you were among
those to whom I gave a little explanation about the background
of the case and what the charges are; do you recall that?
A. Yes.
Q. And we distributed to you at that time a rather lengthy
questionnaire and asked you to fill it out with your answers.
You did that?
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And we had taken your completed questionnaire and made
copies of it, provided it to the lawyers in the case and to me,
and we've read through it; and again, I assure you, as I did
when we were at the Fairgrounds and you completed it, that it's
under restrictions that none of this be used for any purpose
other than what we're doing right now in jury selection.
A. Right.
Q. All right. Now, I introduced myself to you before when we
had that meeting on the 19th of March. There are people in the
courtroom who weren't there and I want to introduce them to you
now so you know who's here in front of you.
At this first table are the lawyers for the Government
in this case. Mr. Joseph Hartzler is the one who's nearest to
me then Ms. Beth Wilkinson Mr. Patrick Ryan and Mr. Lawrence
Mackey.
Over here on the other side of the room we have
lawyers for the defendant: Mr. Christopher Tritico, Mr. Stephen
Jones, Mr. Robert Nigh, and Ms. Jeralyn Merritt; and Timothy
McVeigh is now standing, introducing himself to you.
Now, we're not going to repeat everything that's in
your questionnaire. There are a few things that we'd like to
ask you about now. As I understand it from your answers here
you were born and raised in New Jersey?
A. Yes.
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
Q. And particularly South River, New Jersey, is the place of
your birth. And I know where Newark and Princeton, a few
places are, but not South River.
A. If you know where New Brunswick is, it's outside of New
Brunswick.
Q. All right. And you live now in Broomfield?
A. Correct.
Q. And you came to Colorado how long ago?
A. 18 and a half years ago.
Q. And was that from New Jersey?
A. It was from New Jersey.
Q. And you still have family in New Jersey?
A. I have a son and daughter back there.
Q. And apparently a niece?
A. Well, a niece that I see maybe once every ten years.
Q. Is she a secretary to a judge?
A. Yes.
Q. And in what community is that?
A. I think it's Middlesex, but I'm not sure what county it's
in.
Q. All right. Do you ever talk with her about that judge
or --
A. No, since I only see her maybe about once every ten years,
why I don't talk to her.
Q. Okay. You are on some medication that you take regularly?
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
A. I had a cancer operation and I'm on Tamoxifen.
Q. Now, does that affect you in any way that would affect your
being with us here from 9:00 to 5:00?
A. None whatsoever.
Q. Okay. You are retired?
A. Yes.
Q. And what did you do before you retired?
A. Well, I worked for Sears back in New Jersey and when I left
them for the last, I think it was about nine years, I was
merchandise control manager.
Q. And was that in a retail outlet?
A. In a retail -- retail store.
Q. And you are married?
A. Yes.
Q. What work has your husband done?
A. Well, he worked for AT&T, he was in the computer section of
AT&T when he retired.
Q. And how long ago was that?
A. 13 years.
Q. Did you come to Colorado with retirement in mind?
A. Basically, yes, although we hadn't mentioned it then; but
we always liked Colorado.
Q. You had visited here before when you were living in New
Jersey?
A. Yes.
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
Q. Okay. Now, you mention in your answers on this
questionnaire that your son in New Jersey is in the police
reserves or --
A. He was. He was.
Q. He was?
A. He was when he was in college. He's been out of that for,
well, about 27 years.
Q. Okay. And you've been on a jury before?
A. Yes, in New Jersey.
Q. And how long ago was that?
A. I would say about 25 years. I'm just guessing at this
time.
Q. Yeah. As you remember the case apparently it -- according
to what you wrote here, the case involved someone who escaped
from a prison and used a -- sort of hand-made weapon by
sharpening a tooth brush and used it as a weapon?
A. Yes.
Q. Was anyone injured?
A. No. He used it on the driver of the truck that was
transferring him from -- from the jail to the courthouse and he
got out of there and that some police were there and got him
almost immediately.
Q. Okay. But the driver was simply threatened but didn't get
hurt?
A. He was threatened. He had the tooth brush, the sharpened
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
tooth brush held up against his throat.
Q. Now, you were the foreperson of that jury?
A. Yes.
Q. Right? And how long did that trial take?
A. It was done over in a day's time.
Q. Including the verdict?
A. Including the verdict.
Q. You -- now, have you been on any other juries?
A. No, I have been called but not sat -- served on any.
Q. You have taught Sunday School?
A. Correct.
Q. Do you now?
A. No.
Q. When was it last that you taught Sunday school or Bible
study or something like that?
A. I would say 30 years ago.
Q. So that was back in New Jersey?
A. Yes.
Q. Also you listen to talk shows?
A. Yes.
Q. Talk show radio?
A. Listen to them and laugh at them.
Q. Is that how you -- you've marked Rush Limbaugh as one of
those that you listen to?
A. Well, I listen to him because my husband likes him. I
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
think he's a lot of --
Q. You don't have to complete the sentence.
A. I don't intend to. Thank you.
Q. I understand. You and your husband have some conversation
about what comes on Rush Limbaugh's show?
A. Yes and no. Some of the things I agree with him and some
of them I think. He's too repetitious, see.
Q. Well, I'm just -- you know, I'm not trying to pry into
that.
A. I don't agree with him in very many things, but some of
them I do.
Q. So -- and, yeah, I would expect after a particular show you
and your husband may -- half in fun perhaps -- argue a little
bit?
A. Sometimes, yes.
Q. Differing points of view. Okay.
Now, one of the things that we have to talk to you
about here, because of its importance, is the subject of the
death penalty, and that was addressed here in the
questionnaire. And if you'd like to, turn to page 27; and in
that regard, you know, if -- I'm not suggesting it here, but I
didn't -- I don't think I mentioned to you if there's anything
that occurred to you after you finished this questionnaire that
you'd like to change in your answers or something, feel free to
do it, but I want to call to your attention this question about
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
capital punishment.
And just if you want to take the moment, you can
review what you said about it on the next page?
A. Well I'll tell you --
Q. I'm not asking you now about it --
A. I'll tell you how I feel about it.
Q. Go ahead. I think you're going to do it anyway.
A. I feel the death penalty is required in some cases but only
if it is proved without a reasonable doubt.
Q. Okay. Now, let me follow-up on that a little bit because
it's an important matter in this case.
What we asked you here was a general question about,
you know, what do you think about the law and if you could
change it how would you and so forth. But -- let me ask you
this, is this the first time that you've really thought
seriously about the death penalty?
A. No, I've thought about it over the years.
Q. Uh-huh.
A. As I heard and read about different cases in the paper and
on TV.
Q. Yes.
A. And it would have to be proven to me without any doubt in
my mind that a person deserved to die for any reason.
Q. Let me explain a little about the procedure that is
involved in a case in which the death penalty is a possibility
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
in a federal court; and there are some differences here between
federal law and state law, particularly in Colorado there is a
difference. But let me, first of all, explain the process that
would be followed.
In all criminal cases -- you know, you served in a
criminal case and I assume in that case that after you returned
the jury -- jury's verdict of guilty then it was left up to the
Judge to decide the sentence?
A. Yes.
Q. Right? So, you know, that is the normal thing in criminal
cases, the jury decides whether the evidence presented at the
trial proves all of the essential elements of the crime charged
and if the jurors are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that
the defendant has been proved guilty, they return a guilty
verdict; and I'm sure that's how you were instructed in that
case?
A. Yes.
Q. Then they go home, in noncapital cases, and it's up to the
judge to decide what the sentence should be; and before the
Judge makes that decision, there is further inquiry into the
circumstances of the crime and information about the defendant
as an individual human being, things about his life history,
his employment experience, his family relationships, all of
those things that make each one of us unique; and then there's
another hearing and the Judge then decides on the punishment
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
appropriate for that particular person. You understand that's
the general process?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, it's different when there is the possibility of a
death sentence; and in federal court the jury must decide what
punishment the defendant deserves, and the choices under
federal law are death, life in prison without the possibility
of ever being released or any lesser sentence that is provided
by law.
Before making that choice the jury, just like the
Judge in other cases, must consider additional information
about the crime and about the uniqueness of the defendant as an
individual human being; and that necessary information is given
to the jury at a second hearing and that second hearing
proceeds just like the trial in that the lawyers for the
Government present information that they believe supported that
sentence, and we refer to that as aggravating circumstances;
and on the other hand, counsel for the defendant present
information to support the view that death is not deserved, and
we call that mitigating circumstances.
Now, then, what the jury must do is, considering all
that has been presented, is to decide -- and in this case it
would be as to Timothy McVeigh -- to decide as a moral decision
whether he should live or die.
Now, as with the question of guilt, the law requires
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
the jurors to approach this decision with open minds and be
guided by what they hear and see in court. They may not allow
themselves to be controlled by any preconceived notion about
the facts and the law. They have to wait for all of the
evidence, just as you do at trial, and each juror must make an
independent decision free from the influence of any opinions
publicly expressed by any others and an opinion or decision
based upon the facts and the law. Any personal disagreement
with the controlling law has to be set aside. Have you
followed me on this explanation?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. All right. Now, what I want to ask you now is as a general
matter without considering anything about what the evidence may
show the facts in this case to be, because we don't know what
that evidence is, do you have a personal or a moral or a
religious view either against or in favor of the death penalty?
A. No, I do not.
Q. Will you be able, then, to follow my instructions and give
fair and impartial consideration to all of the facts and
circumstances about the case and about Timothy McVeigh before
deciding what the sentence should be if he is found guilty?
A. I would take everything into consideration before I voted
one way or the other.
Q. All right. Well, the lawyers have some additional
questions for you, and if you'll listen to these lawyers and
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
answer their questions.
Mr. Ryan, you may proceed.
MR. RYAN: Thank you, your Honor.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY MR. RYAN:
Q. Good morning. How are you today?
A. Fine.
Q. My name is Pat Ryan, I'm the United States Attorney in
Oklahoma City where the Murrah Building once stood.
I'm here, along with other federal prosecutors from
around the country, to prosecute what we've known to call the
Oklahoma City bombing case.
A. Right.
Q. We have a job to do in the course of this proceeding and
that is to present evidence to you and to other jurors in a
fair manner with respect to the guilt of the defendant on
trial.
You, as a juror, would have a job to do as well, that
would be to listen to Judge Matsch's instructions, follow those
instructions and listen and consider all the facts before
making a decision. From what I've heard, you can do that.
A. Thank you.
Q. Now, Broomfield is in Boulder County; correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Is it west of Boulder?
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
A. No, it's -- it's halfway between Boulder and Denver. I
would say it would be southeast of Boulder.
Q. How long did it take you, for example, to come this
morning?
A. It's 20 miles. It took me about 35 minutes.
Q. Okay. I saw where you were an avid reader of James
Michener novels?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you read Centennial?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And where you live is fairly close to where he was writing
about, is it not?
A. Well, it's quite a bit north of what he wrote about. It's
quite a bit north of where we lived.
Q. Did you enjoy that book?
A. Very much. I enjoy all his writings.
Q. One thing I found interesting about your questionnaire was
the fact that your mother had been born in Russia?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you tell us a little built about that and when she came
to the United States and what the circumstances were?
A. My mother came over in 1889. She was five years old at the
time; and she came over when my mother's family was in the
professional class. She had professors. Her uncles were
professors and that sort of person and they were no longer
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
allowed to speak or teach in German so they left.
Q. And did she come over with her parents at the time?
A. She came over with her family, her mother and her
stepfather, and there were three sets of children there.
Q. And they settled in New Jersey?
A. They settled in New Jersey, South River, New Jersey.
Q. And as I understood from his Honor's questions, you lived
basically in New Jersey with a short stay in Florida?
A. Right. That was during the Second World War so that's
quite a way back.
Q. Well, it certainly is for me. The -- what brought you to
Colorado?
A. My husband had a -- well, we had -- had visited in Colorado
years ago and thoroughly enjoyed it and my husband was going
back and forth on business trips and I said to him, If you get
a chance to transfer, grab it.
It took him 20 years for them to get a chance to
transfer him here. Then they wanted to move us back when he
retired and we said, No thank you, we'll stay.
Q. And you've enjoyed it here?
A. We've enjoyed it and dislike going back to New Jersey,
except to see the family.
Q. I notice that you have two children?
A. Yes.
Q. One works for -- is an executive with Prudential Insurance
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
Company?
A. Correct.
Q. Do you know what his line of work is within Prudential?
A. Yes, he's -- he's in disaster recovery, in the computer
line of the companies. He goes around the country and sets up
computer disaster recovery for different companies. He did it
for IBM in Boulder.
Q. Was he in any way involved in his work with respect to the
Oklahoma City bombing?
A. No.
Q. Just be more like natural disasters? Hurricanes?
A. Anything coming in that would prove a disaster to
computers.
Q. I see. Excuse me.
A. Or if someone coming in trying to get the -- what would you
say, anybody trying to break into their computer system, he's
in charge of that sort of thing, trying to keep it out and keep
the viruses out and that.
Q. So's an expert in computers?
A. Yes, I would say so.
Q. Well, it sounds like it.
Do you have a computer at home?
A. He does. We don't.
Q. I see. Is that something that later on in life you're
thinking about getting and learning how to use?
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
A. Well, my husband worked with computers when he was with
AT&T and the first thing he said when he retired, I don't want
a computer for Christmas or my birthday.
Q. I think there's someone in this courtroom who shares his
view.
THE COURT: He's talking about me.
BY MR. RYAN:
Q. Do you mind if I ask you a couple of questions from your
questionnaire that you were so kind to fill out?
A. The only thing, I didn't bring my glasses in with me. If
you ask me to read it, I'll have problems.
Q. Well, I'll try to read from the questionnaire then repeat
your answer to you before I ask you a further question about
it.
A. Fine.
Q. When you do have your glasses, do you have pretty good
vision?
A. I only need glasses to read. Sorry.
Q. So you can see me just fine?
A. I can see you fine.
Q. If there is an exhibit in the middle of the courtroom, you
wouldn't have any trouble seeing it?
A. No.
Q. All right. Thank you.
Now, the medication I understood you are taking is
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
simply an antibiotic.
A. Well, I don't know if it's antibiotics. It's Tamoxifen and
I had a breast removed and I have to be on this for five years.
It's supposed to reduce the possibility of recurrence.
Q. I see. Do you feel okay?
A. Yes. Thank you.
Q. Now, I saw that -- and I don't mean to pry in your
religious -- into your religious life, but I see that you are a
member of the Baptist religion?
A. Yes.
Q. And you attend church on a regular basis?
A. No, we don't anymore. We have not joined a church since
we've come to Colorado.
Q. I see here you are familiar with AARP?
A. Yes.
Q. That is one thing I have in common with you. I turned 50
last year and my office gave me an annual subscription to AARP,
to which I was very grateful.
Do you received their magazines on a regular basis?
A. I receive the magazines. I don't agree with everything
they say either.
Q. It sounds like you have a pretty independent mind?
A. I am.
Q. If I might ask just one further question about the case in
which you served on a jury in which a prisoner or someone
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
accused of a crime had stuck a home-made weapon up against the
driver's throat, you said that that case resulted in a verdict.
Did it result in a guilty verdict?
A. Yes, it did.
Q. Now, based on your questionnaire and based on your answers
to Judge Matsch, it's pretty clear that you don't have any
opinions with respect to Mr. McVeigh?
A. No, I do not.
Q. You're willing to engage in the assumption that -- and
presumption that he is innocent as he sits here in the
courtroom?
A. Correct. Correct.
Q. But you have seen, apparently, a fair amount of coverage,
some coverage on the Oklahoma City bombing?
A. I'd like to know somebody who hasn't.
Q. You bet. I think everyone in America was transfixed on
April 19th when this event occurred.
Do you think that based on anything that you saw, the
images you saw on the 19th or the days that followed that, that
would cause you any problems with respect to sitting in
judgment in this case?
A. No.
Q. If you don't mind, I'd like to ask a few questions
concerning the death penalty. I know this is a highly personal
subject for all of us and we don't mean to pry unnecessarily,
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
but of course you understand that that is something that you
may very well have to face in this case?
A. Yes, I understand that.
Q. And I know that you've stated that your views on the death
penalty -- at least you generally favor it, but you recognize
that there was some cases you would give it and some cases you
would not?
A. Correct.
Q. The -- I believe you also stated that the death penalty was
a subject that you had given a fair amount of thought to prior
to coming to Jeffco and filling out the questionnaire?
A. Yes, I -- I've thought about it many years, since I've been
old enough to really consider things like that.
Q. Does the imposition of the death penalty in any way
conflict with any of your religious beliefs?
A. No.
Q. Have you ever changed your view with respect to the death
penalty?
A. No, I haven't.
Q. How long do you -- have you held that view?
A. I think I felt that way since, I would say, in my late 20's
or 30s.
Q. The -- have you ever attended any lectures on the subject
or heard it discussed in church?
A. No, I haven't.
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
Q. Have you ever read any books or articles about the death
penalty?
A. No. Any articles I read, I generally take with a grain of
salt.
Q. The -- you know, it's -- some have said it's one thing to
favor the death penalty, it's another thing to sit as a juror
and to actually have to come to grips with the reality of
having to make the kind of decision as to whether another human
being should live or die; and what I want to ask you to do is
to reflect for a moment and think about being in a jury room
and thinking -- thinking about the compassion you may have for
people of the world; and I really would like to find out, down
deep in your heart do you think that you'd be able, to in a
capital case, to sit in judgment of someone, come into a
courtroom, sign a verdict form and announce that you were
sentencing another person to die?
A. I would do a lot of praying about it and I think the Lord
would guide me in my decision making.
Q. Do you think you could do that?
A. Yes, I could.
Q. Because it's one thing to consider something and it's quite
another thing to actually do it?
A. I realize that.
Q. You know halfway through this trial we'll never know
whether you decided that you had a change of heart on the death
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
penalty and that became something that you just couldn't do.
So this is our one and only final time we will ever have to ask
you whether this is something that you're capable of doing.
A. I'm capable of doing it as long as it's proven to me.
Q. I understand that. Of course we would never ask you to do
anything if it were not proven.
I -- I want to thank you for your time. I want to
thank you for your jury service for coming in here today and
answering our questions. You are a remarkable person and we're
delighted to have you here today.
JUROR: Thank you.
THE COURT: We'll take a recess before we resume. I
know you've been waiting a long time, but we've been in the
courtroom so we'll take about 10 minutes.
You may step out now and we'll have you back in so
that you can answer questions from defense counsel.
JUROR: All right. Thank you.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you. You can just leave
that questionnaire right there if you want.
We'll recess until 10:50.
(Recess at 10:35 a.m.)
(Reconvened at 10:50 a.m.)
THE COURT: Be seated, please.
Mr. Nigh?
MR. NIGH: Thank you, your Honor.
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY MR. NIGH:
Q. Ma'am, as the Court told you earlier, my name is Rob Nigh
and I'm one of the lawyers for Tim McVeigh.
I want to cover some of the matters that the Judge did
not cover with you and that Mr. Ryan did not touch upon.
A. Okay.
Q. And some of the matters have to do with the answers in your
questionnaire. I think that I have the answers here, so you
won't have to try to read them.
A. Okay. Fine, thank you.
Q. One of the things that caught my eye is that you do oil
painting?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you tell me a little bit about that, what kind of
scenes?
A. I do strictly landscapes and seascapes.
Q. Landscapes and seascapes. No portraits or anything of that
nature?
A. No. No, I'm not talented to that extent.
Q. Do you go visit the ocean sometimes to do the seascapes, or
do you do that --
A. Well, what I do, I generally go with a camera and take
pictures and then -- in color and then go back and do it,
because shadows change an awful lot, if you sit down to do it.
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
Q. Kind of a moving target.
A. Right.
Q. I see. I do a little bit of painting myself, but not a
whole lot. But it's one of the subjects that fascinates me.
In Colorado, I assume you have a lot of opportunities
to do landscapes of mountains --
A. Landscapes up in the mountains and that sort of thing.
Q. Do you actually use oil paints, or do you use acrylics
sometimes?
A. No, oil paints.
Q. I never could do that very well.
The other thing that caught my eye about your
questionnaire was some of the television shows that you watch.
One that I couldn't help noticing was a show called "The
Equalizer."
A. Yes.
Q. I'm not familiar --
A. They were all reruns.
Q. Sometimes I like the reruns best myself. But I'm not
familiar with "Equalizer." Can you tell me what kind of show
that is?
A. Yes. He's -- let's see. He's an ex-CIA or something in
that line, not -- it wasn't CIA, but he was ex -- something
like that. And he now goes out and he helps people that are in
need that are having trouble.
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
Q. Equalizes the situation, I guess?
A. Correct.
Q. And thus the name of the show. All right.
He is a -- somebody that helps people out?
A. Yes.
Q. In serious crises, I guess?
A. It's fiction.
Q. Kind of a fantasy show. I understand.
The other thing that I noticed from your questionnaire
was that you regularly read The Denver Post.
A. Yes. With a grain of salt.
Q. Well, I think there are others that do as well. But I need
to ask you about that a little bit, because it may have an
impact upon this case; and I'm sure that you understand that.
A. Yes.
Q. And that the reasons for our questions are so that we can
find out what people may have been influenced by or may have
seen.
So I want to ask you that a little bit, and let's not
limit it to The Denver Post. Let's talk about publicity in
general, if we may. You watched the television coverage
concerning the bombing; is that correct?
A. I did at the start, yes.
Q. Did you see any television coverage concerning the arrest
of Mr. McVeigh?
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
A. I think everybody saw him being taken out in the orange
suit. I did.
Q. At the Noble County Courthouse?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Can I ask you, what did you think when you saw Mr. McVeigh
being led down the steps in that orange suit?
A. I think basically what I think about most TV coverage and
newspaper coverage: They want to emphasize things and they
want it to be spectacular. And you have to look on both sides
of things to see what it really is.
Q. And that's what you thought when you saw Mr. McVeigh?
A. That's what I saw.
Q. All right. So you didn't draw any conclusions --
A. No.
Q. -- on the basis of that.
Since that time, have you seen other reports, either
in the newspaper or on television, concerning what the
Government --
A. I have not seen or read anything. Once I see
Dr. Matsch's -- Judge Matsch's name or Timothy McVeigh in an
article, I will not read it.
Q. I understand. You're abiding by the Court's admonition?
A. Yes.
Q. As difficult as that may be with as many headlines and news
stories as there are --
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
A. Right.
Q. -- concerning the case.
I want to go back, if I can. Before you had the
opportunity to hear the Judge's admonition, before you went to
Jeffco and filled out the questionnaire, did you see any
articles or read any articles concerning what the Government
thought the evidence might be in the case?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Can you tell me about those, anything that you remember
about them?
A. Basically that they thought he was guilty, but I have not
formed an opinion because I don't know what they base their
judgment on.
Q. You saw the conclusion, but you didn't see the reasons for
the conclusion.
A. Right.
Q. You don't remember anything about specific facts that were
alleged?
A. No, I don't.
Q. Any particular piece of evidence that you recall being
referenced?
A. Well, I remember something about fertilizer and whatever
goes into fertilizer that they mix and that's what the bombs
were made out of, but I don't remember anything that proved
that he did it or he didn't do it.
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
Q. And so for your opinion, that's just a wide-open question?
A. Correct.
Q. Is that the way you view it?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, if I can, I want to direct your attention back to the
period after you met with the Judge at Jefferson County and
after you received the summons in the mail and it became clear
to you that there was a reason for you to avoid publicity.
I have no doubt in my mind that you were as careful as
anybody could possibly be about that. Was there anything that
you couldn't avoid that was beyond your control that got
brought to your attention about the case?
A. No, because there is just two of us at home. And my
husband is good: If he hears something on TV, he'll shut it
off. And we have not discussed it since then.
My daughter and son are back in New Jersey; and of
course, now it's reaching there, and of course, they do know
that I've been called.
Q. Sure.
A. And my daughter called the other night. And we have a
speaker phone; and she said, Dad, she says, will you pick up
the phone because, I want to tell you something.
And I don't know what it was that she told him. So we
are trying to be very careful.
Q. I know that you are, and it sounds to me like you've been
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
reasonably successful in that.
A. Well, with just two of us there, it's easy to do, yes.
Q. There is no headlines that have jumped out at you and
caught your attention?
A. No. I have gotten to the point now where I don't read the
first section of the paper at all.
Q. And that's all that anyone can do.
A. Well, Sunday's paper had a whole section on it, and I
discarded that.
Q. Did you let your husband read it?
A. He read it.
Q. I want to turn, if we can, for a moment to the questions
and the issues involving the death penalty for just a moment.
There has been a lot of discussion necessarily about whether or
not you are able to consider such a penalty; but as I
understand it, you served on a jury before in New Jersey?
A. Yes.
Q. And from that experience and from what you know generally,
you understand, do you not, that we have to talk about that
simply as a protective measure?
A. Correct.
Q. This case may never get to that point.
A. Correct.
Q. You're aware of that. You understand that if Mr. McVeigh
were found not guilty, then that would be an academic issue?
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
A. Correct.
Q. And as I understand it also, you haven't formed any
opinions about whether or not we'll ever get to that stage.
A. Right, I have not.
Q. There are a couple of other areas about your questionnaire
that I just wanted to touch upon; and one was in reference to
the criminal justice system. I believe you were asked a
question about your view about the criminal justice system.
A. Well, I don't know what I answered then, either.
Q. Rather than you have to look for it, let me read what I
have as your answer. Would that be all right?
A. Certainly.
Q. I think what you said is that it works well but not always
the way that it should. Does that sound familiar to you?
A. Yes, it sounds familiar.
Q. Did you have anything in particular in mind when you said
"not always the way that it should"?
A. Yes. I think the plea bargainings have gotten out of hand.
If a person -- to me, if a person is guilty and admits to his
guilt -- that he is guilty, then he should be punished in some
way and not let go.
Q. Not let off scot-free --
A. Right.
Q. -- under those circumstances.
And that's what you had in mind when you answered that
Juror No. 609 - Voir Dire
question?
A. That's what I had in mind.
MR. NIGH: Your Honor, may I have just a moment?
THE COURT: Yes.
BY MR. NIGH:
Q. One of the other areas in your questionnaire that I didn't
touch upon was the mystery novels that you read. Can you tell
me what kind of mystery novels those are?
A. Almost any mystery novels. I like them because they're
pure fiction. I've gotten to the age where I don't want to
take in anything and spend time with anything that requires a
lot of thought, and I want -- I read for enjoyment now.
Q. Certainly. So when you're reading a mystery novel, do you
try to solve the crime or the mystery?
A. Sometimes.
Q. But that's not too much work in the novels that you're
reading?
A. I used to do it. I used to be pretty good at it; but there
again, fiction is fiction.
Q. It certainly is.
MR. NIGH: Ma'am, I thank you very much for your
candid answers, and we thank you for your time this morning.
Thank you, your Honor. That's all I have.
THE COURT: All right. You'll be excused now and can
go home; but I want you to assume that you're going to be on
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
the jury. This process of selecting the jury is going to take
us a while, as you understand; and so we won't be able to tell
you for a while. And the best way for you to help us is to
continue to do what you've been doing, avoiding discussion of
the case with all other persons and be careful to avoid
publicity that may relate to the case and that could influence
you as a juror; so with that, we'll be in touch with you, of
course.
You're excused for now.
JUROR: Thank you.
THE COURT: We have 523.
If you'll just raise your right hand and take the oath
from the clerk, please.
(Juror No. 523 affirmed.)
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Thank you. Have a seat,
please.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY THE COURT:
Q. You -- we're going to refer to you as Juror No. 523, and
we're using numbers instead of names for reasons that I think
are apparent to you.
And you'll recall that you came out to the Jefferson
County Fairgrounds' auditorium on March 19; and at that time, I
appeared there and gave you and other members of the jury panel
some explanation about the case and what the charges were and
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
asked you to fill out a questionnaire. Do you recall that day?
A. Yes.
Q. And indeed, you did fill out a questionnaire then, turned
it in; and we have taken your answers, the completed
questionnaire, made copies, distributed them -- these copies to
the lawyers and to me. We've read those but have also kept
them confidential because, as I told you then, we're using your
answers only for purposes of going through this process of jury
selection.
One of the things that happens to us, I think, when we
encounter a questionnaire like this and work under some time
limits on answering is that as we walk away from that
experience, something else comes to mind and you think about,
Well, I should have answered it a different way, or I forgot
this or that.
If there is anything like that in your experience and
you want to change any of these answers, you are, of course,
free to do so. I don't mean to have you read through whole
thing now and reaffirm it or change it; but I just want you to
feel free to change any answers if there is any reason to do
so.
Also, at the time that you were there, I gave some
instructions with respect to avoiding publicity, and you recall
those?
You'll have to answer out loud --
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
A. Yes.
Q. -- so that we can make a record of your answers here.
Now, it also is the case, as we well know here, that
there has been a lot of publicity about this matter; and it can
certainly be the case that inadvertently something has
happened, you've seen something or someone has talked with you.
Has that happened?
A. The television is usually on in our house, and every now
and then I do overhear a little. But we were gone for a week
and I didn't hear anything then, and I have avoided reading
about the trial.
Q. All right. And you've talked to people in your family
about your status as being on the jury panel, I assume?
A. Yes.
Q. And also where you work? Did you talk with anyone there?
A. I have been on vacation and I have been -- and I am still
on vacation.
Q. Okay.
A. So I have been generally out of touch; but there are people
at work that are aware of this, yes.
Q. Has anyone talked with you about that or expressed any
opinions to you as to how you ought to handle this situation or
whether you want to be on the jury, that kind of thing?
A. Yes.
Q. What has been said to you?
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
A. Well, mostly people say things like, "Oh, do you -- don't
you want to be on the jury," and things like this; and the
people -- a lot of people that I work with are fairly
opinionated.
Q. And have you said in response --
A. I say no.
Q. -- no, you don't want to be on the jury?
A. That's correct.
Q. All right. And that's a true expression of your opinion, I
take it.
A. Right. And I think this has puzzled people, because I
think a lot of people, when they think about being on a jury,
they think, oh, it's -- it would be such a neat thing to be on
this kind of a jury.
Q. Well, we're going to talk a little about what jury service
would be in here and also some of the answers to the questions;
but before we do so, I want to introduce people to you who were
not there when I introduced myself to you so that you'll know
who it is who is here in the courtroom in front of you and
seeing you here.
And here at this first table are lawyers for the
Government in this case responsible for the prosecution of the
case. Mr. Joseph Hartzler is the man seated nearest to me,
Ms. Beth Wilkinson next to him, Mr. Patrick Ryan, and then
Mr. Lawrence Mackey.
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
Over here we have counsel for the accused:
Mr. Christopher Tritico, Mr. Stephen Jones, Mr. Robert Nigh,
Ms. Jeralyn Merritt; and Mr. Timothy McVeigh is standing to
introduce himself to you.
Now, I'll ask you a few questions and then lawyers for
each side have a chance to ask you a few more questions. And
you understand this doesn't mean you're on trial; we just need
a little expansion of the information that you've been
providing us.
I understand from your answers that you were born and
raised in Ohio?
A. That is correct.
Q. Is this Medina, Ohio?
A. Medina.
Q. Medina. I know a little about Ohio, but I don't know where
that is.
A. It's out of Cleveland. At this point, I think it's almost
considered -- well, not a suburb, but a lot of people that work
in Cleveland do choose Medina as a place to live.
Q. When you were there, there was some distance between that
town and Cleveland?
A. Actually, I was raised in Wadsworth, which is even a
smaller town 10 or 12 miles away from Medina.
Q. Okay. And then you came out to live in Colorado when?
A. Initially, I believe I came out in -- must have been 1960.
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
Q. And you first lived in Colorado Springs --
A. That's correct.
Q. -- when you came out?
You were there about five years?
A. That's correct.
Q. And then went where?
A. We went to Corvallis, Oregon.
Q. And you were there about another five years, then to Akron?
A. Right.
Q. And then to Colorado after that?
A. Right.
Q. Okay. Now, you're now working, are you, at a circulation
library in Jefferson County?
A. Right.
Q. That's the public library, tax-supported library there?
A. Right.
Q. And you've been, what, on the circulation desk?
A. Right.
Q. How long?
A. It will be six years in July.
Q. There was a time that you worked in the oil and gas
industry; is that right?
A. That's correct.
Q. And you did -- I believe you showed that your title was
land analyst?
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
A. Right.
Q. That is a person who evaluates prospects? They used to
call some people in the business "landmen," but that is
something that has gone out of fashion, I'm sure.
A. It's basically support in the land department, and that can
involve all kinds of different work situations. I worked for
several different oil and gas companies from time to time; so I
did -- we kept track of leases, we kept track of assignments.
I ended up verifying division orders.
Q. Okay.
A. So I did kind of a lot of different kinds of things.
Q. Would it be fair to say that you worked more in the matter
of acquisition and control of the lands as compared with
evaluating the prospects for finding oil or gas?
A. Right.
Q. And did you have any training or have any experience at all
with seismic exploration of properties, anything like that?
A. No.
Q. Okay. And then you also have done some teaching, have you?
A. Yes.
Q. And what subjects have you taught?
A. I taught fourth, fifth and sixth grades; and that was
approximately five different years.
Q. Now, was that your full-time employment during those years?
A. Yes.
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
Q. Okay. And your husband is -- has a doctorate in electrical
engineering?
A. That's correct.
Q. Was he teaching?
A. Yes.
Q. Was that why you lived in Corvallis at the time?
A. He was going to school at the university there, getting his
doctorate.
Q. All right. Was his -- well, has his career been
principally teaching at the college level?
A. Yes. He taught both at University of Akron and at School
of Mines until his retirement.
Q. Okay. And electrical engineering, I assume, is the
subject?
A. That's correct.
Q. You have in your questionnaire expressed some opinion with
respect to whether you believe Mr. McVeigh is guilty of the
charges.
A. Yes.
Q. And that was based on things that you read and heard before
you appeared and filled out this questionnaire.
A. Yes.
Q. That is a fixed opinion?
A. From what I've read at this point, it would be a fixed
opinion, yes.
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
Q. Now, you recall that among the things that I said when we
were together in Jefferson County is that a lot of the things
that have been circulated about the case may be wrong.
A. That's true.
Q. Incorrect. And that, of course, what a jury has to do is
disregard the things that have been out there in the media and
focus on what happens in the courtroom at the trial where the
rules of evidence apply, which is, I said in my remarks out
there, of course, is not true with respect to what appears in
newspapers, magazines, and so forth.
Obviously, there are different standards. And as a
juror here, you would be required by law to set those matters
aside and open your mind and decide according to what you heard
as the evidence and also recognizing that there are
restrictions by law as to what a jury can consider. That's
what the rules of evidence are. Understand that?
A. Yes.
Q. Are you prepared to do that?
A. Probably.
Q. Okay. We also asked you some things about the death
penalty; and I'd invite you to look at what your answers were
just to refresh yourself, if you want to. You will find on
page 27, going over to page 28, those questions and answers
that you gave to them. If you want to take a moment to refresh
yourself as to that, please do.
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
A. Okay. I see what I have written.
Q. Okay. Now, is that the first time that you have seriously
confronted what you think about the death penalty?
A. Yes.
Q. It's been a subject, I'm --
A. Well, maybe not.
Q. Okay.
A. I think I've always had the opinion, the same opinion; but
as to whether or not I have been questioned about it, the
answer would be yes.
Q. Yeah. Is the opinion that you've expressed here, as I
understand it -- it's not motivated by religious view but by,
what, a moral -- from a moral standpoint?
A. Just my own personal view.
Q. Okay.
A. You can call it moral, you can call it religious.
Q. Does it have a basis in your experience with something or
your having read about a particular case or something like
that?
A. No, I don't think so.
Q. Okay. Now, the focus of the question there was very broad,
and it was in terms of what do you think about it if you had
the power to write the law. Our focus today is going to be a
little sharper because we need to discuss this with you. It's
a possible issue in this case specifically; so I want first to
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
explain to you how the issue may arise.
You understand -- let's see. Have you ever served on
a jury before? I've forgotten.
A. No.
Q. All right. Well, in all criminal cases under our legal
system, the jury decides whether the evidence presented to them
in the trial proves all of the essential elements of the crime
charged and what those essential elements are told to the jury
in instructions that the judge gives at the end of the
evidence. Understand?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Then if all of the jurors are convinced beyond a reasonable
doubt, considering only the evidence and the law, that the
defendant has been proved guilty, they return a guilty verdict;
and in noncapital cases, that finishes their work and the
jurors go home; and then it is up to the jury to decide what
the sentence should be.
And before a judge makes that decision -- I'm talking
now about federal law -- before a judge makes that decision,
there is an additional inquiry into the circumstances of the
crime and also information about the defendant. And that
information considers the defendant as an individual human
being, things like life history, employment experience, family
relationships, all of those things that combine to make each
one of us unique.
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
And there is then another hearing, and the sentencing
judge then decides what sentence is appropriate for this
particular person. That's how it's done in cases where there
is no possibility of a death sentence.
Where there is such a possibility, then under federal
law the jury must decide what punishment the defendant
deserves. And the choices for the jury to consider are death,
life in prison without the possibility of ever being released,
or any lesser sentence provided by law.
Now, before making that decision, the jury, just as is
true of the judge in other types of cases, must consider
additional information about the crime and about the uniqueness
of the defendant as an individual human being; and that
information is submitted to the jury at a second hearing which
proceeds much like the trial in that counsel for the Government
present information that they believe supports a death
sentence. Counsel for the defendant present information which
they want the jury to consider in reaching a decision that
death is not deserved. And we call the first aggravating
circumstances and the second mitigating circumstances.
Now, the jury must consider both the aggravating and
the mitigating circumstances and the information that's
presented and then make a decision, which amounts to a moral
judgment as to whether the defendant, in this case Timothy
McVeigh, should live or die.
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
And just as is true with the question of guilt, the
law requires that the jury -- jurors approach this task with
open minds and be guided by what they hear and see in court and
must not allow themselves to be controlled by any preconceived
notions that they may have about the facts and the law in the
case, and each juror must make an independent decision, free
from the influence of opinions that may have been publicly
expressed by others and a decision that is in accordance with
the facts and the law of the case, which includes the court's
instructions about mitigating and aggravating circumstances.
Any personal disagreement with those principles of law
must be set aside.
Have you followed along my explanation of this
process?
A. I think so.
Q. Okay. Now, with this in mind, I must ask you as a general
matter and not considering anything about what you may have
heard or think that the evidence in this case may show that the
facts of the case may be, do you have now a personal or a moral
or religious view about either -- against or in favor of the
death penalty?
A. Yes.
Q. And that's the view that is -- is it the same view that
you've expressed here that essentially says -- well, you tell
me what it is.
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
A. I don't believe in the death penalty at all.
Q. And is it your view that the law, the -- our society that
is represented by the law has no right to take the life of any
person?
A. It is.
Q. And is this such a fixed view that you have that it would
prevent or substantially interfere with your ability to decide
under the law whether a defendant found guilty should be
sentenced to death?
A. I think I would not be able to do that.
Q. So that is the real question here: Would you be able to
follow the law and the Court's instructions and give fair and
impartial consideration to all of the facts and circumstances
in the case and about Timothy McVeigh before deciding it and
include death as one of the possible sentences?
A. I don't think I could do -- do the death penalty.
THE COURT: All right. I'll ask counsel if they wish
to inquire as well.
Ms. Wilkinson.
MS. WILKINSON: Just a few questions, your Honor.
THE COURT: Yes.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY MS. WILKINSON:
Q. Good morning, ma'am. As the Judge told you, my name is
Beth Wilkinson, and I am a member of the prosecution team for
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
this case.
When you were answering the Judge's questions, you
were careful to answer them honestly, I could tell; and you
even corrected one of your answers, telling the Judge that you
had had these views on the death penalty for quite some time.
Is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. It sounds like you come from a family that values ideas and
education; is that right?
A. I think so.
Q. And have you talked about the death penalty with your
husband and your children?
A. No.
Q. How did you develop your views on the death penalty?
A. Well, I don't think I have ever believed in it, and I
cannot remember when it was instituted in our country. Maybe
you can help me with this, but I don't think it was that many
years ago. And I remember at that point in that I could not
believe that we had gone back to the death penalty; so I've
held this view for probably a long time now.
Q. Would it be fair to say that you don't believe there should
be any state-sponsored killing?
A. That is correct.
Q. And would it also be fair to say that you do not want to be
part of a jury where that might be part of your obligation?
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
A. That is correct.
MS. WILKINSON: No further questions, your Honor.
THE COURT: Any questions, Ms. Merritt?
MS. MERRITT: Just a couple, your Honor.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY MS. MERRITT:
Q. Good morning, Juror 523.
A. Good morning.
Q. My name is Jeralyn Merritt, and I'm one of the attorneys
representing Mr. Timothy McVeigh.
And we've all heard your answers about the death
penalty questions, but I just want to ask you a couple of
questions, maybe a little different way. I noticed in your
questionnaire that you said that you believe it's important to
follow the Court's instructions. Is that still true?
A. Yes.
Q. And would you agree that there are a lot of laws that -- or
there are some laws that a lot of us would not agree with in
this society?
A. I'm not all that familiar with too many laws per se.
Q. Are there any laws you can think of that you don't agree
with in this country?
A. I'm sure there probably are. If I were aware of laws and
laws and laws, which I am not because I really don't encounter
them in my day-to-day --
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
Q. And the questions that you answered on your questionnaire
concerning the death penalty: Those had to do with how you
would write the law, if it were up to you. Do you recall that
on the question?
A. Yeah -- well, I recall the death penalty questions, yes.
Q. And when you answered that, you felt that you didn't
believe the death penalty was ever justified. Right?
A. That is correct.
Q. Now, what you're being asked today, as the Judge indicated,
is a little more specific. It has to do with whether or not
you could put your personal beliefs aside and follow the law as
the Judge instructed you to and -- after considering all of the
evidence in the case.
A. I think I could except in the case of the death penalty,
because to me, that's -- that's all there is.
Q. And you say that, even knowing that the Judge has told you
that the death penalty is only one of three possible sentencing
options in this case that the jury might -- can consider and
should consider both the death penalty and then also life
without the possibility of parole and then also the possibility
of any lesser sentence authorized by law.
A. I think in this particular case, there is going to be so
much pressure that it would be difficult for someone with my
viewpoint to more or less -- I think I would be put in a
position where I would just have to say, you know, I do not
Juror No. 523 - Voir Dire
believe in the death penalty and I really don't want to be
placed in a position where I would have to have to make that
choice.
Q. And I take it you don't want to really be on this jury, do
you?
A. No.
MS. MERRITT: I'll stop, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Well, we're not making
decisions about individual jurors as we go; so we respect your
views and your coming in here and answering these questions.
I'm going to have to instruct you to continue to do as you've
been doing because we don't know who is going to serve and who
isn't going to serve; so you must act as if you are going to be
on the jury in spite of these views; and we'll get back to you
and give you the decision with respect to that at some time in
the future.
JUROR: Thank you very much.
THE COURT: Thank you. You can leave for today.
Let's see. Juror 762.
If you'll just raise your right hand, please, and take
the oath from the clerk.
(Juror No. 762 affirmed.)
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Thank you. Have a seat,
please.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
BY THE COURT:
Q. Let me explain a few things here in the beginning: First
that we're going to be referring to you not by your name but by
the juror number that's been assigned to you, which is 762; and
I'm sure you understand why we're doing that.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Also, you will recall that I met with you and other persons
summoned for jury duty out at the auditorium in Jefferson
County Fairgrounds on March 19; and I explained the background
of this case, what the charges are and something about the jury
selection process to you then. You recall that day, I'm sure.
A. I do.
Q. And at that time, we distributed to you a questionnaire,
asked you to complete it, and you did that, turned it in; and
then since then, we have taken your answers, the completed
questionnaire, made copies for the lawyers and me. We've
looked those over, and we want to ask you a few additional
questions.
A. Yes.
Q. Let me first assure you that all of us who have seen the
questionnaire are under restriction that it's not to be used --
your answers are not to be used other than for this process; so
we're trying to do our best to preserve your privacy. And we
know that March 19 has been a few days ago, and I just want to
do two things here: One, if there is something that has
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
occurred to you since you were out there answering these
questions that would change any of your answers, feel free to
tell us that and change anything that's in here because we
understand that under the circumstances and the time pressure
sometimes things occur to us later; so if at any point you want
to do that, just tell me and you can change anything.
Also, although I cautioned you that you must avoid
anything in newspapers, magazines, television, radio, whatever,
including conversations with others, there is always with such
publicity as there has been about this case -- always the
possibility that you would come across something or somebody
talk with you.
Has that happened at all since you've completed the
questionnaire?
A. I've avoided the television, newspaper. Anyone begins to
start to talk about the situation, I walk away.
Q. Okay.
A. And I tell them I don't want any part of anything.
Q. Now, there are some people who know about your being on the
jury panel, I'm sure, like members of your family?
A. My husband, my supervisor.
Q. And you've talked to your supervisor. Has your husband or
supervisor or anyone else suggested to you how you should
respond to this or whether you should try to get off the jury
or anything like that?
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
A. My supervisor just mentioned just come back to work as soon
as possible. My husband, no one has told me anything.
Q. All right. Now, there are people here in the courtroom
today who were not there and who were not introduced to you;
but I want to introduce them to you now so you'll know who is
here with us. And we have here at this first table lawyers who
represent the Government in this case and will prosecute it,
and that's Mr. Joseph Hartzler, who is here nearest to me;
Ms. Beth Wilkinson; Mr. Patrick Ryan, and Mr. Lawrence Mackey.
Counsel for the defendant are Mr. Christopher Tritico,
Mr. Stephen Jones, Mr. Robert Nigh, and Ms. Cheryl Ramsey. And
with them is Mr. Timothy McVeigh, Mr. McVeigh standing to
introduce himself to you.
So these are the people in the room who are going to
be participants in the trial.
Now, I have just a few questions to ask of you based
on what you told us in the questionnaire. I understand that
you were born in and I guess grew up in New Mexico?
A. Yes, your Honor.
Q. I know something about New Mexico, but I don't know
where -- is it Roy?
A. Roy.
Q. I don't know where that is.
A. It's a small town on the other side of -- by Tucumcari --
Tucumcari and Las Vegas, New Mexico.
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
Q. And you came to Colorado quite a few years ago; so you grew
up, though, in New Mexico?
A. New Mexico.
Q. Went to school there?
A. Yes.
Q. And you also lived in Phoenix?
A. Three and a half years, your Honor.
Q. And when was that?
A. 1979 to '84.
Q. Why were you down there during those years? You had been
in Colorado and then went to Phoenix?
A. My husband got hurt and he wanted to -- a nice, warm
climate, so we moved to Phoenix and I worked over there, just
transferred from one place to the other.
Q. And your husband was seriously injured; right?
A. Yes.
Q. And he's disabled now?
A. He's like disabled. He doesn't work.
Q. Because he's unable to?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, did he get hurt on the job?
A. Yes, your Honor.
Q. What job was he doing then?
A. He was working over at Bethesda Hospital, and his arm went
through the window and he had surgery on it like four different
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
times, so he hasn't really been working since then.
Q. Was the arm cut badly?
A. He's had four surgeries on it, and it just tightens up; and
he chauffeurs me around.
Q. So it cut right through the tendons and everything?
A. Yes.
Q. And you indicate here that there was some kind of a dispute
about that. Was that a worker's compensation hearing?
A. Yes.
Q. And then was there also Social Security disability, or is
it all the worker's comp.
A. It was, I guess, social -- compensation. He has never
received Social Security.
Q. And did you have -- did he have a lawyer representing him
in the worker's compensation matter?
A. I think so.
Q. Was that ever settled to his satisfaction and your
satisfaction?
A. Yes. He settled, I think, after three years.
Q. Was it -- was the family going through financial hardship
during that time, or was he getting paid during that time?
A. No, he wasn't getting paid. I was working. We've always
managed.
Q. Okay. You have children, and you lost a daughter. Is that
right?
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When she was just 11 years old?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was that -- I don't want to dwell on that because I know
it's painful, but was that by illness or accident or --
A. Illness.
Q. Okay. Was it a long illness?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, you're working at the Mariposa Health Station now?
A. Yes, your Honor.
Q. And you're an LPN and have be for a number of years?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And have worked at other health care facilities?
A. I worked at --
Q. Hospitals?
A. Yes.
Q. What hospitals have you worked in?
A. I worked VA for almost 20 years and Fitzsimons, Saint
Anthony's, and Saint Joe's. Almost 40 years of hospitals,
nursing.
Q. And what years were you at Fitzsimons?
A. From 1989 to 1991.
Q. And at the VA?
A. '69 to '89.
Q. Now, have you worked in particular units of the hospital
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
taking care of particular kinds of patients?
A. All kinds of patients: Respiratory, medical, surgical,
ENT, neurology, urology, everything.
Q. Have you taken care of war-wounded?
A. Yes.
Q. And from the Vietnam War?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With all kinds of injuries, some of them too terrible to
imagine; is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And have you worked with emergency medical teams or
anything like that?
A. I was a respiratory ten years at VA in the emergency room.
Q. So you were caring for acute --
A. Open chest, open heart.
Q. There was a time when you had a problem with respiration,
apparently inhaling some fumes somewhere?
A. Yes. I was working at the VA and they were renovating the
sixth floor. We didn't have any air-conditioners or fans, and
I was all by myself that Saturday, and they had just spread
some kind of glue or something on the floor to put that new
tile; and I was cleaning up equipment that day, getting our
respirators ready. And I worked there three hours on the ward
before going down to the units, and by that afternoon I was
dizzy and short of breath.
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
The next day I came back to work again, on a Sunday.
By Monday, I couldn't get out of bed and it was -- I was having
respiratory problems; and I went to the doctor, and that's when
he said, Have you been around any fumes?
And I said no.
So I called my supervisor, and he said, Well, they
laid down this stuff on the floor, you know, for the tile.
That could have had something to do with it; so I was sick like
almost three weeks --
Q. And that was --
A. -- with respiratory problems.
Q. Yeah. And those were acute problems at the time?
A. Yeah.
Q. Have you had any long-range effects from that?
A. No.
Q. So it was something that healed with time and some
medications?
A. Yes. I had an inhaler to help me so I could catch my
breath whenever I got short of breath.
Q. But your breathing has been -- how long ago was that?
A. Back in '86 or '87, I believe.
Q. Now, if you'll turn to page 21 and Question 97. I'm not
clear there. I understand about your husband's situation and
you've already described it. But with respect to this
respiratory distress that you had, did you sue somebody for
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
that?
A. My credit union -- not credit union -- but the union from
VA; and I went to speak to this one lawyer and we got him to --
we got like $3,000 from that company for the time lost and for
my problems of going to the doctor.
Q. Now, what company are you talking about? I don't mean by
name, but is it the company that was --
A. Doing all the remodelling at the hospital. It was not the
government.
Q. Okay. You served on a jury when you were in Phoenix?
A. Yes, your Honor.
Q. And what kind of a case was that?
A. Drunk-while-intoxicated driver.
Q. All right. And was anyone -- this driver was accused of
operating a vehicle intoxicated. Was anyone hurt?
A. No.
Q. And what did the jury decide there, guilty or not guilty?
A. We found him guilty. It was his third offense, so we found
him guilty.
Q. And were you the leader of that jury, the foreperson?
A. No, sir.
Q. You had a bankruptcy back years ago. Was that when your
husband was hurt?
A. Yes, your Honor.
Q. And that's the reason that you had to do that, because he
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
lost his income?
A. Yes, that's when we sold the home and moved to Phoenix.
Q. Okay. Now, on page 27 -- if you'll turn, please, to page
27 and then over on page 28, just take a moment to look at
that. 27 is -- Question 121 is where we asked you about the
death penalty. And then over on page 28, you have some
answers.
A. Okay.
Q. Do you just want to take a moment to review them?
You have those in mind?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, at that time, when you were doing this questionnaire
and you came to those questions, is that the first time you
thought about the death penalty in a serious way?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. We have to talk about the death penalty some more
because it's a very serious issue and it can come up here.
Now, you served on a jury before, as you've already
told us. And that was in the state court in Phoenix, I'm sure;
right?
A. Yes.
Q. And you participated with others and returned a verdict of
guilty. And then it was up to the judge to do the sentencing.
Right?
A. Yes.
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
Q. So you understand that in criminal trials where the death
penalty is not involved, that's what happens. The jury decides
whether the evidence that has been presented to them in the
trial proves all the essential elements of the crime; and I'm
sure the court there instructed you about those essential
elements in that case for that trial. And then if the jurors
are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that what they heard
and saw as evidence in the case proved the defendant guilty,
they returned a guilty verdict; and that's what you and the
others did; right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, when there is not a capital case; that is, death
punishment possibility, the jurors go home; and then it's up to
the judge to decide what the punishment should be, what the
sentence should be. And there is then usually a further
inquiry into the circumstances of the crime and information
about the defendant as an individual human being, life history,
employment experience, family relationships, all of those
things that go together to make each one of us unique. And
then the judge has a hearing and considers those things and
then decides what is the appropriate punishment for that
particular person. That's the normal process.
Now, when the possibility is there for a death
sentence, it is different under federal law. And here we are
under federal law.
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
Here, the jury must decide what punishment the
defendant deserves. And the decision is made among the choices
of death or life imprisonment without the possibility of ever
being released, or some other lesser sentence provided by law.
Now, before the jury can make that decision, just as
it is true for the judge in other types of cases, the jury has
to consider additional information about the crime and about
the uniqueness of the defendant, considering the defendant as
an individual human being.
Now, that information is given at a second hearing;
that is, what we call a penalty-phase hearing, and then
proceeds just like a trial in most respects, in that the
lawyers for the Government present information to the jury that
the lawyers believe supports a death sentence; and we call that
kind of information aggravating circumstances. Counsel for the
defendant, on the other hand, present information to be
considered in support of a decision that death is not deserved;
and we call that mitigating circumstances; so the jury has
before it aggravating circumstances and mitigating
circumstances and then has to decide, specifically in this
case, if he were to be convicted, as to Timothy McVeigh, the
defendant, and make a moral judgment, a moral decision as to
whether he should live or die.
Now, have you followed me so far on this explanation?
A. Sure.
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
Q. Now, as is true with the question of guilt and whether it's
been proved, the law requires that the jurors approach this
task of deciding on the penalty with open minds and be guided
by what they hear and see in the courtroom, and they must not
allow themselves to be controlled by any preconceived notions
or ideas that they might have about the facts of the case or
the law. They have to wait and hear it; and each juror must
make an independent decision, free from any influence of
opinions publicly expressed by others and an opinion that
follows the facts and the law. Any personal disagreement has
to be set aside -- any personal disagreement with the
controlling law. You understand?
A. I understand.
Q. Now, I want you to consider these points. Tell me as a
general matter, without considering anything about what the
evidence might show the facts of this case to be, because we
don't know what that evidence will be, do you now have any
personal or moral or religious views either against or in favor
of the death penalty?
A. No.
Q. And are you telling me that you would be able to follow my
instructions about what the law is and give fair and impartial
consideration to all of the facts and circumstances that may be
shown about this case and about Timothy McVeigh before deciding
what his sentence should be, if he is found guilty?
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
A. I feel I understand what you're telling me and I can go
with whatever rules you explain to me.
Q. And decide on the basis of what you see and hear?
A. The facts, yes, sir.
Q. And include in your decision the three possibilities that
I've talked about and give serious consideration to each one,
one of them being death, one of them being in prison without
ever getting out, no release, and the other is anything lesser?
A. Yes.
Q. You could do that?
A. Yes.
THE COURT: All right.
Mr. Ryan, do you have some questions for the
Government?
MR. RYAN: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: Please.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY MR. RYAN:
Q. Good morning.
A. Good morning, sir.
Q. How are you?
A. Fine, thank you.
Q. You say that your husband drove you --
A. Yes.
Q. -- to where you needed to go this morning?
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
A. Yes.
Q. Do you not drive?
A. No. I quit driving when Denver grew up in the 50's -- '79.
Q. So it's not a matter of you not being able to drive; you
just choose not to drive in all this congestion and traffic?
A. Yes. I'd rather have someone drive me or take the bus or
walk. I don't want to be hurt or hurt anyone, so . . .
Q. Did you grow up in New Mexico?
A. Yes, your Honor -- yes, sir. Yes.
THE COURT: He's honorable, but he's not his Honor.
BY MR. RYAN:
Q. I don't think so.
That's all right. I know you're probably nervous.
Certainly understandable. It's a very serious matter we're
here today on; and are you a little nervous?
A. No.
Q. Doing okay?
A. I'm fine.
Q. Okay. You went to high school there in New Mexico?
A. I went up to 8th grade and quit school, helped my parents.
Q. Okay. And then what did you do?
A. When I was 16, I got married. I was a volunteer at the
hospital for like two years, and then I met my husband at the
hospital and got married, went on and became a nurse's aide for
18 years and had my four daughters.
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
Q. Now, did you go back and complete your high school?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And in fact you attended a couple of years of college, did
you not?
A. Yes.
Q. Towards a nursing degree?
A. Yes. 20 more hours for my RN, but I don't care to go back
to school at my age.
Q. The -- I gathered from some of the questions the Judge
asked you that you've been in all kinds of situations as a
nurse.
A. Yes.
Q. Have you ever been in the operating room?
A. I -- like on standby to observe?
Q. Yes.
A. Three different situations, I've been in the operating
room.
Q. But you would not call yourself an operating room nurse? I
mean maybe that's not even a proper term.
A. No.
Q. How about in the emergency room? On the respiratory
therapy side of it, you have been in the emergency room?
A. Yes, helping to draw blood and assisting with the EKG
machine, tracing of the heart.
Q. Now, you have four children, three of whom are still alive?
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Your oldest -- all daughters?
A. All daughters.
Q. Your oldest daughter works -- and I had a little trouble
here. Is it Public?
A. Public Service of Colorado.
Q. Okay. Public Service of Colorado. Is that --
A. Here in Denver.
Q. What service do they provide?
A. She works with the benefits insurance and --
Q. Is that an electric company?
A. Electric company, Public Service, you know, for lights and
gas, all that.
Q. Your next daughter is -- does that say "accountant"?
A. Yes. She works for TCI Cable.
Q. I see.
A. She's --
Q. She takes care of their records and their financial
documents and the like?
A. Yes.
Q. I would like to talk to you just a bit more about your
husband and his injury, if you don't mind. You explained to
his Honor that your husband had an accident involving sticking
his arm through a glass; and tell -- would you tell us a little
bit more about that injury, though, what he's prevented from
Juror No. 762 - Voir Dire
doing.
A. Well, they told him that the arm -- he could only do so
much with it, working with it so much; so like now, he's
painting the house and his arm gets real tired because he
can't -- he has to mostly use his left arm most of the time.
It also, I guess, affected his back, because he complains of
his back hurting a lot, too.
Q. And as a result of that, does he receive worker's
compensation benefits?
A. No.
Q. Does he receive any kind of benefit each month?
A. No. Nothing.
Q. Are you the sole m