Judge, lawyers in Jessop trial sift panel as jury selection goes into another day
 
By Trish Choate
San Angelo Standard-Times
 
SAN ANGELO, Texas — ELDORADO — The jury pool was poised to shrink Monday afternoon because of blood relationships and heavy publicity in the trial of Raymond Merril Jessop.

Seven of the approximately 17 members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Saints who had been called for jury duty in the trial told a prosecutor they were related to Jessop, the 38-year-old FLDS member accused of child sexual assault. The allegation against Jessop is a second degree felony punishable by 2 to 20 years in prison.

It is the first criminal trial to come out of the historic raid by the state against the sect’s ranch near Eldorado. Jessop and 11 other men were indicted by a Schleicher County grand jury late last year, with many of the allegations springing from records and other evidence seized during the April 2008 raid.

On Monday in a cramped space inside the Memorial Building in Eldorado, the sect members sat shoulder-to-shoulder with fellow Schleicher County residents summoned for jury duty in Jessop’s case. The day started with 153 out the original 300-member pool. Nearly half the prospective jurors were previously excused or exempted.

The prairie dresses and intricate braids of the women and the long-sleeved simple shirts and jeans of the men — as well as their names — made the YFZ Ranch residents stand out from their neighbors.

State prosecutor Eric Nichols was first up among the attorneys to suss out prospective jurors’ feelings on various issues or determine if they were qualified to serve during voir dire, the trial-within-a-trial used by jurists to settle issues that come up during court proceedings.

Nichols’ question about being related to the defendant was the first expected to whittle down the panel.

But no hands went up when Nichols asked if anyone was related by marriage to Jessop.

Some of the soft-spoken women had to repeat their names several times.

The sect members are known to take more than one "spiritual wife" as part of practicing their religion.

An April 2008 raid of the sect’s YFZ Ranch near Eldorado resulted in the removal of more than 400 children since returned to parents or guardians and criminal charges against 12 FLDS men.

The publicity was international, and recognizing that, Nichols decided not to ask anyone if he or she had heard about the case.

Instead, he asked if anyone hadn’t.

"I don’t see any hands," Nichols said.

He explained that the issue wasn’t whether members of the jury panel had seen or heard anything about the FLDS but whether they could put that aside "in a box" to participate in a jury.

"Is there anyone sitting in the panel ... that just feels like they would not be able to put whatever they’ve heard ... aside?" he said.

The issue is central to whether or not a jury can be seated in Schleicher County, which has a small population and was the focus of relentless news reports.

At least 10 people quickly volunteered that they would not be able to put the publicity aside. None of them appeared to be FLDS sect members.

When Nichols asked if any members of the panel had "personal, moral, philosophical or religious views" that would prevent them from sitting in judgment of a person in a criminal case, a single person raised a hand.

She did not appear to be a member of the FLDS.

The jury panel returned from a lunch break to find numbers on their seats at about 1:30 p.m. Monday. A complete reorganization of where the members were to sit ensued.

At about 2:45 p.m., voir dire began.

First, 51st Judicial District Judge Barbara Walther asked some basic questions and advised the panel on certain issues such as how long all this would take.

Walthers told them it was like having a baby.

You know it’s coming. You just don’t know when.

Defense attorney Mark Stevens used his time to address the potential jurors and emphasize the importance of basic legal system tenants such as being innocent until proven guilty, proving beyond a guilt reasonable doubt and the letting the burden of proof rest with the prosecutors.

Stevens asked a variety of questions to find out whether the potential jurors would have any conflicts with their duty to be impartial.

"If this isn’t the right case for you, please tell us," Stevens said.

Stevens asked questions such as whether the issue itself of sexually abusing a child influences the potential juror’s partiality, whether anyone had ever worked for Child Protective Services, worked for a hot line or advocacy group or whether anyone was closed to a victim of sexual crime.

Among other questions, Stevens asked if anyone was uncomfortable with the penalty for the crimes in question: two to 20 years in prison and/or a fine not to exceed $10,000. Thirty-seven people said they were.

Stevens also went through a list of dozens of potential witnesses and went through each one and asked if anyone knew the potential witness, which was often the case.

Walther asked the first two rows of jurors, 36 people, to stay late and be interviewed by the lawyers, and the rest were told to not speak to the media and to return by 9 a.m. Tuesday.
 
gosanangelo.com
Originally published October 26, 2009
 
Back