Although this juror's probation had been terminated after a probation violation in one of the cases, since she was ultimately discharged from probation, her rights were restored.
Could Cellini argue that because the juror lied to the Court about her past convictions, she was not "of fair character" or "of approved integrity?" Courts in Illinois have held that the question of fair character and integrity should be decided on a case by case basis. But this was a federal trial and federal law prohibits service only by those felons whose rights have not been restored by the state.
After the issue came up in the trial of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, some federal judges began ordering background checks on jurors in high profile cases. [More...]
After the Ryan debacle, Chief Judge James Holderman assigned the federal court’s probation and pretrial services offices to conduct criminal background checks on jurors for certain high-profile cases — but only when approved by the trial judge.
Some judges, though, don’t like the background checks, considering them an invasion of jurors’ privacy. No checks were performed for the Cellini case, and to my knowledge, no public explanation offered. Judge James Zagel, who presided over the Cellini trial, had ordered background checks for the trial of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
The convictions were discovered by the Chicago Tribune after the Judge, once the trial was over, ordered the release of juror questionnaires. The juror's convictions were for crack-cocaine possession and aggravated driving under the influence without a driver’s license.
It appears the issue Cellini's lawyers will raise is whether her lies about her prior convictions were intended to insure she get on the jury, indicating a bias.
Webb said Friday the juror in question had “multiple felony convictions and gave wrong answers [on her jury questionnaire] three times.”
“There is no question if somebody lies three times to get on a jury, she has a bias,” Webb said
The juror may say she was just embarrassed to admit her prior convictions. Or that she thought they were expunged once she completed probation. Or any other reason having nothing to do with a desire to get on the jury.
It will be interesting to see if the Judge thinks the issue is significant enough to allow Cellini, who is 76, to remain free pending appeal if the judge denies the motion for mistrial.
