The case we were assigned was an armed robbery & assault case. The defendant, a skinny 19 yr old guy who was about 5’7” & maybe 160 lbs, was accused of going into a tanning bed/video rental place one morning and robbing and pistol whipping the lady clerk who was opening the store. The case against him was based on two things:

1. The clerk picked his picture out from a lineup of local juvenile offenders.

2. A grainy video of a guy in a red hoodie. You could not see his face. But, he had the sleeves pulled up so you could see his forearms.

The defense countered with:

1. His very ancient grandmother, a retired Sunday School teacher, who testified on the morning of the robbery, she cooked him breakfast then his boss came and picked him up to go to work in Bham.

2. His boss, a preacher at a local church, who testified that he picked him up from his grandmother’s house and took him straight to their job site in Bham where they remained until late that day.

3. The owner of the house in Bham, who happened to be an attorney, who testified they were installing cabinets all day that day and did not leave until late that afternoon. They also showed video from the home owner’s security system that showed the boss’s truck parked in his driveway all day without leaving.

4. The prosecution’s own grainy video showing the perp’s forearms, which were from a muscular guy who had forearms at least two or three times larger than this kid’s forearms.

5. The cops who searched the grandmother’s house where they did not find (1) a pistol (2) a red hoodie or (3) the money he was supposed to have stolen.

When both sides rested and we went into the deliberation room, I polled the rest of the jury. All were already in agreement. There was no way this guy did it. We were not in that room more than 5 minutes, if that, before we came back with a “not guilty” verdict.

When we were dismissed I left the court house feeling bad for this kid who had been sitting jail for however long (I think it was like 2-3 months) awaiting trial. I was also horrified at the incompetence of our law enforcement and judicial system for bringing such an obviously flawed case to trial. The sheriff’s dept “investigation” (I use that term loosely) consisted of bringing in a binder with mug shots of every teenager who’d ever been booked for whatever offense and had her pick one out. The one whose pic was picked was the one they chose to prosecute despite the mountain of evidence that there was no way he could be the perp they were looking for. This kid’s only prior offense is he’d been busted with some marijuana and a bong when he was like 17.