Louisiana Voice

Venire

və-nī′rē, -nîr′ē

noun

1. A writ issued by a judge to a sheriff directing the summons of prospective jurors.
2. The panel of prospective jurors from which a jury is selected.

Article 408 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the State of Louisiana says in part:

In parishes other than Orleans, the jury commission shall select impartially at least three hundred (300) persons having the qualifications to serve as jurors, who shall constitute the general venire. A list of persons so selected shall be prepared and certified by the clerk of court as the general venire list, and said list shall be kept as part of the records of the commission. The name and address of each person on the list shall be written on a separate slip of paper, with no designation as to race or color, which shall be placed in a box labeled “General Venire Box.” (Emphasis added.)

The law further says that the jury commission “shall meet” at least once every six months (or when ordered by the court) to supplement the General Venire after deletions of those who have died or otherwise become disqualified to serve.

Petit jury members are drawn from the General Venire. A petit jury is a regular trial jury, assembled to determine criminal or civil liability.

Article 416 says of the drawing of a petit jury venire:

A petit jury venire for the first week of a session shall not be drawn from a general venire containing less than two hundred fifty (250) names, and no petit jury venire for any subsequent week shall be drawn from a general venire containing less than one hundred fifty (150) names. (Emphasis added.)

Gary Holder, is a retired military and commercial airline pilot whose son, Chris, was convicted of second-degree murder in a 2014 split-jury verdict. The victim was Chris’s mother and Gary Holder’s wife, a physician. The elder Holder is convinced his son was misdiagnosed at age 15 and was administered 34 major psychotropic drugs over the next five-plus years, some of which were clearly labeled not to be given patients under the age of 18 and to avoid combining medications.

He said Chris went into what was diagnosed as a “prescription drug-induced schizophrenic rage” that led to his killing his mother.

He also feels his son received inadequate legal representation and that the defense attorney failed to request a continuance of the trial when the Holders’ expert witness encountered a conflict during the week of trial. He also says the original defense attorney failed to object to the method of jury selection.

Gary Holder spent seven years researching court records after he received word from a friend who told him the jury selection in his son’s trial in Bossier Parish had been manipulated. He said he subsequently discovered some significant – and alarming – information:

The 26^th Judicial District, comprised of the parishes of Bossier and Webster:

• Has no records of the construction of the General Venire or of the Qualified General Venire;
• Has no records of any requests to be excused from jury duty;
• Has no records of the mailing of questionnaires/summonses or their return;
• Only 45 potential jurors were chosen for the Grand Jury venire, rather than the minimum of 50 persons required by law.
• Records of unserved or excused members are inadequate or non-existent.

Holder researched seven venires over those seven years and discovered that on the first day of session in all of the venires he examined, “the maximum number of jurors is 141 and it should have been 250. Every venire that was examined showed that they were far under the number 250.”

Moreover, Holder noted that on the questionnaire and summonses that were sent out to each potential juror, a statement at the bottom of the form said, “If you request to be excused you must provide and attach to this questionnaire a current letter from your doctor if an illness or a handicap prevents you from serving as a juror. Requests to be excused from jury duty for any reason must be in writing and mail to the judge’s office…” (Emphasis added.)

“There were 409 potential jurors that were excused,” Holder said. “Of that 409, there were only 144 letters requesting to be excused and of those requesting to be excused, only 89 had a signed letter by the judge. Of all those excused, there was never any supplementation of the General Venire for those individuals that were excused,” he added.

In the movie The Runaway Jury, based on the John Grisham book of the same title, there is a scene in which a blind man approached the bench to inquire of the judge as to why he was not considered for jury duty. The judge explained that he was not required to serve because of his handicap. But the man persisted, saying the court was guilty of discrimination because he had not requested a waiver and indeed, wished to be considered.

He was subsequently chosen and was selected as foreman of the jury.

While purely fiction, the episode does provide an object lesson that could be applied to the 26^th JDC and quite possibly other judicial districts as well. Pursuant to the Louisiana Constitution, persons 70 years of age or older may claim an exemption for jury duty based on age if they do not wish to serve. But there is no requirement that they be excused.

In fact, Article 783 of the Code of Criminal Procedure says in no uncertain terms:

No person or group of persons shall be automatically excused. (Emphasis added.)

In the seven venires examined by Holder, “every juror over the age of 70 was summarily dismissed and there is no documentation showing any request to be excused. There were 77 jurors over the age of 70 that were summarily dismissed. Not a single one of those sent in any request to be excused,” Holder said.

Finally, Article 416.1 says in part:

The questionnaire may constitute part of the sheriff’s return and may be made part of the record. When served in accordance with this Section, a person may be cited for contempt for failing to appear in response to the subpoena. (Emphasis added.)

“Of the seven venires that were examined, on the first day of the session(s) there were 71 no-shows but…only 10 writs that were issued for those 71 no-shows. Of the remaining 61 no-shows, there is no record of any request to be excused,” Holder said. “Why (were) these individuals excused and who authorized their excuses? Were they told in advance they didn’t have to appear?”

Holder saved his most inflammatory accusation for last.

“A request was made to LPR Investigations, a (Texas) forensic document and handwriting examination private investigative firm specializing in forensic document examination and handwriting identification investigations,” he said.

“LPR Investigations scanned 26^th JDC notice jury questionnaires and associated documents. More than 227 documents were discovered to have been altered and/or forged. LPR Investigations submitted seven reports on jury questionnaire authentication and accomplished a forensic report on each venire,” he said.

TOMORROW: What were those alterations? What was forged?