Current Events > Juror fined $11k for mistrial after Googling ICE agent's supremacist patch

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/juror-googled-ice-officers-mysterious-uniform-patch-result-11k-contempt-2021-06-30/

The night before a federal jury in Camden, New Jersey, began deliberations in the U.S. governments case accusing Kevin Ruiz-Quezada of assaulting an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer, a juror named Stephen Meile had questions.

During trial, jurors had been shown a photograph depicting a patch on an ICE officers uniform. There was a suggestion that the patch was a trade union logo. Meile, a retired pipefitter, didnt think it was.

So he looked it up on Google and told fellow jurors what he found out. (More on that later.)
And now hes facing a fine of $11,227 after being held in criminal contempt for defying court orders and causing a mistrial in Ruiz-Quezadas case.

U.S. District Judge Richard Kugler of Camden imposed the fine on Tuesday after a show-cause hearing, two weeks after the judge declared a mistrial in the Ruiz-Quezada case because of Meiles Google search. The $11,227 fine represents the cost of empaneling the jury in the mistrial.

Its one of the most extreme punishments ever meted out to a U.S. juror who breached court instructions prohibiting internet research, according to John Browning of Spencer Fane, who has written extensively about jurors, social media and the internet. Judges in the U.S., Browning said by email, have typically punished jurors with smaller fines or community service, even when their Google searches or social media posts have resulted in mistrials. (A juror in the U.K., by contrast, was sentenced in 2011 to eight months in jail for corresponding with a defendant on Facebook during jury deliberations in the defendants drug trial.)

The whopping New Jersey penalty, Browning said, represents an attempt to have the offending jurors fine for contempt at least approximate the cost to the justice system.
Meiles counsel in the contempt proceeding, Mark Catanzaro, declined comment.

In the underlying criminal case Meile was empaneled to decide, the New Jersey U.S. Attorneys office alleged that Ruiz-Quezada resisted arrest when ICE officers came to his home in December 2017 to execute an administrative arrest warrant and initiate immigration proceedings. Ruiz-Quezada, a lawful permanent resident, contended that he was not resisting arrest but merely reaching for a coat because it was early in the morning and he was dressed in pajamas. One ICE officer experienced a hand injury in the scuffle inside Ruiz-Quezadas house. He was indicted for assaulting a federal officer.

The criminal trial before Kugler was originally scheduled for July 2020 but was delayed because of COVID. Jury selection finally took place on June 10. Prosecutors and defense counsel from Loughry & Lindsay presented two days of testimony and delivered closing statements on the morning of June 15.

The jurys deliberations came to an abrupt end that afternoon, when Juror 7 informed a court official that another juror had disobeyed the judges instructions and conducted online research. The first juror didnt know Meiles name. But in sworn testimony, according to a transcript of the late-afternoon hearing, Juror 7 told Kugler that Meile had looked up the logo on the ICE officers uniform the night before deliberations began.

When the jury took the case, Juror 7 said, Meile asserted that his research showed the ICE officer's patch was a white supremacist logo.

He said that to the whole jury? Kugler asked. What was the reaction of the other jurors?
Juror 7 said jurors weren't influenced by Meile's white supremacist assertion because no one knew if it was true. But they were all distressed about Meiles violation of court orders, the juror told Kugler.

Everybody was very upset that he just didn't listen and did the research," Juror 7 said. (I asked the New Jersey U.S. Attorneys office and defense counsel Justin Loughry for additional information about the ICE officers patch and its role at the trial. A spokesperson for prosecutors declined to comment and Loughry didnt respond.)

After Juror 7s testimony, prosecutors and defense lawyers agreed that Kugler should declare a mistrial because Meile's disclosure of his search results had tainted the jury.

The judge asked whether he should also take action against the juror. Prosecutors said yes: We would ask that you bring him in, put him under oath and question him. He's clearly in contempt.

The judge asked only a few questions of Meile that afternoon, confirming that the juror understood his admonition not to conduct research, nevertheless Googled the logo and then told other jurors about his findings. Kugler told Meile he would have to come back to court for a hearing on his actions. You may have committed a serious offense against the court, the judge said, warning Meile that he could face serious ramifications for defying court orders.

This is awful, Kugler told the lawyers in the case, according to the transcript. It's an awful situation.

---

pretty sure White supremacists have infiltrated every level of law enforcement and gov fbi told us this years ago that dude shouldnt have googled it tho

stupid. shouldn't have told anyone they looked it up.

---

It sounds like they were given specific instructions and every other juror understood that

---

Fair next

---

Yeah, you don't look at outside information here.

---

monkmith posted...

stupid. shouldn't have told anyone they looked it up.

Rather he come out now before rendering a verdict though. Shouldnt have Googled it when told not to.

Fuck ICE and their white supremacists though. God forbid someone want a coat.
---

How long until we can just get an all AI jury that determines guilt?

---

Pretty fucked that they would have gone through the whole trial without knowing about the white supremacist symbol.
---

Antifar posted...

During trial, jurors had been shown a photograph depicting a patch on an ICE officers uniform. There was a suggestion that the patch was a trade union logo. Meile, a retired pipefitter, didnt think it was.

Can't have the jury avoiding intentional misinformation, no sir.

---

Maybe the prosecution should have told the truth about what the patch represented in the first place.

---

EmbraceOfDeath posted...

Maybe the prosecution should have told the truth about what the patch represented in the first place.

Was it the prosecution or defense?

---

DrizztLink posted...

Can't have the jury avoiding intentional misinformation, no sir.

I mean, tbf, it makes sense to not be able to Google anything while deliberating. Guy should have done something like a hung jury if the prosecution refused to identify the patch. And not just we think its... but actually verifying it.
---

Man this is why you should never be on a jury. Fuck that shit.

They probably figured it could make the jury biased against the ICE officer when the ICE officer isn't the one who is on trial. Whether or not that guy is a white supremacist is not what determines guilt here, and if it were relevant evidence it would have been presented as such.

This is basically a juror independently investigating a case in the middle of the trial

---

Yeah all of this aside (and assuming it's true) how come the prosecution didn't even bother to point this out in the trial itself?

---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

I mean, tbf, it makes sense to not be able to Google anything while deliberating. Guy should have done something like a hung jury if the prosecution refused to identify the patch. And not just we think its... but actually verifying it.

I agree with the spirit of the law, it's just a little annoying in this particular circumstance.

---

That's how the jury system works. Fine seems excessive, but I don't find it disagreeable.

---

NoMeLx22x posted...

Yeah all of this aside (and assuming it's true) how come the prosecution didn't even bother to point this out in the trial itself?

Well, considering the prosecution was relying on the ICE agent's testimony,

---

I definitely get why this is contempt, but that fine is insane

---

Fair next. Who knows if what he found on Google is even true? Doing your own internet research doesn't hold up in a court of law. That said, ICE definitely seems like the kind of law enforcement to have a major white supremacy problem.

---

Smashingpmkns posted...

Pretty fucked that they would have gone through the whole trial without knowing about the white supremacist symbol.

This is the bigger concern. Makes sense that the modern day Gestapo is filled with with people openly wearing white supremacist symbols.

---

Also a reminder, Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men would have been held in contempt and the case would have been a mistrial for exactly this reason when he brings out the knife.

---

Antifar posted...

when Juror 7 informed a court official that another juror had disobeyed the judges instructions and conducted online research.

Fucking narc man.

The defense should have pointed that out so the dude just had a bad lawyer. Hopefully the defense can point it out in the next trial.

---

Juries should be out for the truth, and if they are gonna lie about it being a trade patch then I don't see how googling the truth is some less ethical than lying in court.

---

This seems wrong


---

Robot2600 posted...

Juries should be out for the truth, and if they are gonna lie about it being a trade patch then I don't see how googling the truth is some less ethical than lying in court.

Because theres no way to cross examine Google in the deliberation room. The juror could have looked at only positive things on Google about the agent and itd still be a mistrial.
---

Yeah this seems like something the defense attorney should have brought up in the trial.

---

Maybe don't lie about what the patch meant.

---

DeadBankerDream posted...

Also a reminder, Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men would have been held in contempt and the case would have been a mistrial for exactly this reason when he brings out the knife.

Was just about to post this- 12 Angry Men was one of the first "serious" films to have a strong impression on pre teen Ruvan22.

Antifar posted...

December 2017 to execute an administrative arrest warrant and initiate immigration proceedings. Ruiz-Quezada, a lawful permanent resident

Fucking abolish ICE. Hopefully the mistrial gives the guys defense team time to build up a solid case and get him off.

---

Robot2600 posted...

Juries should be out for the truth, and if they are gonna lie about it being a trade patch then I don't see how googling the truth is some less ethical than lying in court.

So how is it not perjury of the ICE guy to lie about it?

---

Judicial system doesn't care about the truth, only protecting white supremacist goons that work within it

---

Glad I've never been served for Jury Duty.

---

Regrettably, this is fair.

That ICE guy seems like a scumbag, but if misinformation is presented in court it's on opposing counsel to refute it - you can't just go 12 Angry Men on the situation.

---

yet another reason never to try everything you can to avoid jury duty

---

Yeah, that's an independent investigation. You can't do that.
---

Ruvan22 posted...

Was just about to post this- 12 Angry Men was one of the first "serious" films to have a strong impression on pre teen Ruvan22.

Yeah I read a few legal analysis of 12 Angry Men and they said that bringing the knife in and trying to reconstruct the crime would have been a huge no-no.

Cocytus posted...

Yeah I read a few legal analysis of 12 Angry Men and they said that bringing the knife in and trying to reconstruct the crime would have been a huge no-no.

Conversely, one of my other favorite films is My Cousin Vinny (which also covers the topic of proving guilt) and it's now used in some law schools as an example of how to present a solid defense

can the ice agent be tried for perjury

---

ThePieReborn posted...

Yeah, you don't look at outside information here.

That is a rule I have always opposed. There have many cases where someone was found guilty and later the jurors said they would have found them innocent if they had seen evidence that was hidden from them

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Yeah, that's an independent investigation. You can't do that.

Why not?

---

Oh fuck off, white supremacist defenders

---

Zikten posted...

That is a rule I have always opposed. There have many cases where someone was found guilty and later the jurors said they would have found them innocent if they had seen evidence that was hidden from them

This. It's the dang 21st century. People have access to so much information at any given moment - how can you expect them not to use it? If it needs to be contextualised or debunked that's what the adversarial system and the courtroom itself is for.

---

Its bull shit. If they presented the patch in the trial, what it actually means is relevant. Them simply saying oh its just some union thing shouldnt be the end of it. Fuck that.

---

what if it was just something he knew off hand? does he still need to pretend to believe the lies and/or omissions?

regardless though, while this is a failure of the defense more than the juror, it is still something he knew he wasn't allowed to do. the fine is incredibly excessive, but some sort of punishment should have been expected. but, we shouldn't be ruling out perjury, either.

---

Tldr

---