Bil Browning

Video: Brandon McInerney Jurors Speak

Filed By Bil Browning | September 16, 2011 12:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Living
Tags: anti-gay violence, Brandon McIrney, jury deliberations, larry King, video interviews

Two of the jurors from Brandon McInerney's trial for killing Lawrence King talked about the deliberations with an LA Fox station. Fascinating. I've never been a juror for a trial, have you?

Brandon McInerney Trial Jurors Talk about the Case: MyFoxLA.com


Recent Entries Filed under Living:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


So basically, since they don't want a retrial, they want to let him go.

These women didn't follow the judges' instructions. This was NOT a trial as to whether he should be tried as an adult, that decision was already made. If they were unable to do that, then they should have RECUSED themselves. They don't want to 'forget about the boy (sic) who was murdered' but, in effect, they are. The jury system in this country is a sick joke.

Yes, I was a juror -- and on a murder trial, in DC, with lesser included charges, just like these ladies. We spent LOTS more time deliberating, sent MANY more notes to the judge that we were hopelessly deadlocked, and were told MUCH more often to go back and keep working.

In our case, we worked lots harder and didn't give up. I think these people should be ashamed of not doing their civic duty. They should have at least tried harder to reach a verdict.

Having watched the tape, I wonder how the Alternate juror knew that the feelings were so strong on both sides. Alternates, in my experience, do not deliberate with the jury and are dismissed when deliberations begin, having heard the entire case but being unneeded. Since jurors are not permitted to discuss the case until deliberations begin, how did she know how strong the feelings were on both sides?

There were several other followup questions I would have asked, but of course the anchors wanted to know if they'd change their minds now. Stupid media.

I had a lot of very angry thoughts about this yesterday. I just can't bring myself to say them again...

My feelings on the crime itself are one thing, but their explanations of their decisions are an entirely different thing and it makes me furious...

Jaime Dunaway Jaime Dunaway | September 16, 2011 3:29 PM

They sound as if they pretty much want him to just be able to walk away from this, pitying the killer isn't gonna do much for justice, Larry or larry's family. And it bugged me that to them, the vicim is basically just a side concern that shouldn't be forgotten but was anyway.

"Sexual advances"? "Nothing would be accomplished by retrying him"? I am too disheartened to comment.

You can sympathize with the devil all you want, but it's still the devil.

Rachel Bellum | September 16, 2011 10:38 PM

On an earlier post from Dr. Wiess I commented that I wanted to hear what the jurors were thinking. I'm not sure what I learned from this video. It did seem like the defense successfully made sympathy for McInerney the foremost thought in their minds.

Right now I'm just having trouble understanding how jurors can say there's no point in retrying McInerney or even that doing so would be a tragedy.

It's also worth pointing out they only deliberated 4 days. 4 days for a murder trial is NOT long and not worth calling a mistrial. This jury (and very likely the judge) gave up. They didn't want to be responsible for what they were supposed to do with this case.

Rachel Bellum | September 17, 2011 3:31 PM

I've been wondering about that. Is there some reason the judge had to declare a mistrial. It certainly seems like juries often deliberate longer and it seems like I've heard of deadlocked juries being sent back to deliberate more times than this one. Is there some local law/rule/expectation at play here? Could the judge have ordered longer deliberations?

"14 year olds, especially young men, are not known for their decision-making!"

Yeah, I remember how many point-blank execution-style shootings there were at my high school. It's just youthful hijinks!

Just appalling. Excuse me while I go attend to my nausea.

These two bigots are accessories to murder.

He should be retried until a verdict of murder is reached, but in a nation governed by bigots and those who pander to them that won't happen.