Monday, November 30, 2009

ayres' New Lawyer Doesn't Get Juror's IDs

Jonathan McDougall,  (Early 1990s style webmaster?) and new attorney for william hamilton ayres (accused of molesting many young boys under the guise of practicing "psychiatry") apparently didn't do a very good job arguing for access to juror's contact information.

I didn't go to the hearing, but it seems that Mr. Joshua Melvin of the San Mateo County Times did!

Read his article in the paper! Thanks, Mr. Melvin!


  1. The article states McDougall can send the questions/form style to those jurors who were the last hearing was it not determined only one juror was interested?

    Get out the popcorn......

  2. Holy Fast Commenting, Batman...

    Give me a second to punch the "publish" button will ya?

    Last time, they had a stack of responses from jurors and alternates. (I didn't count how many were in the stack... far less than 16 from the look of it. And I seem to recall the judge saying that not everyone bothered to respond even to that questionaire.

    By McDougall's accounting of what he read in the responses, about 1/3 were opposed to further contact, and one did not object. (It sounded like that person actually specified that they didn't mind contact.) In my mind, I felt that this meant that there may have been a few who were "neutral" in the matter.

    If I were a juror, and thought the new defense attorney needed to know something, he'd have gotten a phone call from me long ago. He has a nice little web page with his number on it. Assuming it hasn't changed since 2004.

    Popcorn sounds yummy. I'm going to have some right now.

  3. Ack... sorry about the dangling parenthesis in paragraph three above. Hate it when I do that.

    Kindly place this one - ) - in an appropriate position.

  4. Yeesh... far fewer... Need some sleep.

  5. Thanks for posting DS....


    I almost missed that in the paper!

  6. It's a reasonable compromise, though if I had been on that jury, I'd not want to talk to ANYONE on the defense side.
    They'll probably just toss it as a "junk mail" thing.
    Or get that empty pit in their stomachs thinking "Oh no another jury summons!" when they see the return address.