A new twist

Well, folks, we have a new twist in the case.

Elijah Reid has filed a federal lawsuit in U.S. District Court, Rock Island, seeking $17 million because he claims Rock Island County Jail correctional officers Jeff Stulir and Bryan Browne did not let him use the jail’s law library, though Judge Walter Braud ordered he be allowed to use it for an hour a day.

You can read the full, handwritten text of the complaint here (warning – contains spelling and grammatical errors): http://thecourtroominsider.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/reid_fedsuit.pdf

At the very least, it will be interesting to see if anything comes of this. I was at the hearing in July, 2009 where Judge Braud ordered jail officials to allow him an hour a day in the law library. Jail officials seemed to indicate that should not be a problem. Another interesting aspect is that neither Mr. Reid nor his attorneys said anything in any of the hearings leading up to the trial. Nor did they say anything during the trial itself. Rock Island County Sheriff’s Lt. William Kauzlarich told me he thinks it’s “sour grapes” and that he finds it hard to believe a correctional officer would not obey a judge’s order.

Adding to the mystery is another federal lawsuit, also filed in U.S. District Court in Rock Island. This one was file last month by Rock Island County Jail inmate named Samuel R. Scott. Mr. Scott, who, at least according to court records, is in jail on a charge of possession of a controlled substance. Mr. Scott’s suit also claims corrections officers – the same two named in Mr. Reid’s suit, in fact – did not let him use the law library.

So that’ s where we are. No court dates have been set for either federal suit, so I can’t say when I’ll know any more. But I’ll keep an eye on it.

It’s not over

I know I’m a couple weeks late with a post about this, but since Elijah Reid’s trial ended, I’ve been fairly busy. So I’m sorry this is so late, but I figure it’s worth talking about here.

As you’ve hopefully read, Elijah Reid changed his mind. On Jan. 21, Mr. Reid filed a motion in Rock Island County Circuit Court to change his sentencing agreement.

For those just tuning in, I’ll recap. Mr. Reid was convicted on Jan. 15 of killing Ryan Ferry and Jermaine Robinson. The pair was found in Mr. Ferry’s car in Rock Island on April 11, 2008. Both had been shot in the head. Though prosecutors were going to seek the death penalty against him, he agreed to a sentence of life in prison and to give up all his appeal rights. Prosecutors agreed to the sentence and that was the end.

Or so we thought.

“I did not know what I was doing at the time because I had a lot of family members telling me what to do and I was not in my right state of mind,” Mr. Reid said in the handwritten motion. “I want a chance to fight for my life because I did not do this crime.”

Here’s the problem. The motion says he wants to withdraw his “plea agreement.” But as his lawyer, Stephen Richards, pointed out to me when I called him that day, Elijah Reid did not make a plea agreement. He made a sentencing agreement and gave up his right to appeal. And Mr. Richards was as unsure as I was as to where things would go next.

My guess is that Mr. Richards has a better idea by now. But I don’t. All I know is that there’s a hearing on the motion Feb. 9. It will be interesting to see what happens. It appears that this motion took at least Mr. Richards by surprise and I know I was certainly surprised by it.

I guess all we can do now is wait for the hearing, so stay tuned. I’ll hopefully have an update before the hearing. But even if I don’t, I’ll definitely have one after.

I’m also hoping to retool this blog a bit. After all, the trial is over, but there’s a lot of great courtroom drama going on in Rock Island County and I’m hoping my editors let me keep using this space to talk about it all.

Family input

Well, folks, by now you’ve heard, I’m sure, that Jeff Terronez agreed to not seek the death penalty in exchange for Elijah Reid forfeiting all his appeal rights and spending his life in prison. If not, feel free to check out this story.

If you click that link, make sure you check out the comments. A commenter who goes by Stateville1991 says this: “Maybe…Terronez wants to ‘play nice’…since the FBI is still ‘snooping’ around the various county offices. Terronez doesn’t realize that…he has it ‘backwards’ as far as the death penalty goes! More punishment for this crime, not less…despite what the victim’s families want!”

Now, Stateville 1991 raises an interesting point. Mr. Terronez took the death penalty off the table after family members of Jermaine Robinson and Ryan Ferry agreed to it. But Stateville seems to be suggesting that Mr. Terronez should have ignored the wishes of the family and sought the death penalty anyway.

My question is this: Do you agree? Should Mr. Terronez have sought death against Elijah Reid even though the families of the victims said they would be ok with life in prison for him?

Something to consider: At the bottom of the story I wrote, you’ll find a quote from Janea Robinson – Jermaine’s little sister. In it, she says she was very excited about the death penalty at first. But she adds that the important thing is the guilty verdict, regardless of what actually happens to Mr. Reid.

Another question Stateville1991 raises: How much input should victims’ families be allowed to have in decisions like this? Should it be totally at the discretion of the prosecutor? Granted, legally, it IS totally up to Mr. Terronez to make the decision to seek the death penalty or not. But how much weight SHOULD a prosecutor give to the wishes of the victims’ families?

As per usual, post your responses in the comments section. And I’m asking you all this: PLEASE keep it civil. No personal attacks. No insults. Argue vehemently and passionately, but stick to the facts and the issues. Don’t turn it into a lot of name-calling. Thanks.

Another question

I’ve got to say, I’m incredibly happy with all the comments I’ve gotten here on this blog. For the most part they’ve been civil and polite and all have been very intelligent. So thanks, everyone.

A commenter with the handle Smarterthantheaveragebear has said a couple interesting things about this post. I’d suggest checking them out. He’s not the only one who has posted good stuff over there, either.

But Smarter brings up a good question: How many of you folks reading have ever been on a jury? What sorts of cases were they? What were the verdicts? What were the ultimate sentences? What were deliberations like?

Post your stories as comments. I look forward to reading them all.

For the record, I’ve never been on a jury. I’ve been summoned for jury duty twice in Chicago, but both times, I was away at college and couldn’t serve. So I’m very curious about what it’s like.

A question to ponder

A commenter, who goes by Mortimer, said some interesting things in one of his comments on this post. I decided to share it here because it’s something I think is worth discussing publicly.

He writes: “So it comes down to a cigarette butt? In a car he’d been in several times before? This is why I have such a big problem with the death penalty. It should only be used when someone is guilty beyond ANY doubt, but in practice it requires only beyond reasonable doubt.”

Well, first off, I want to say for the record that I don’t agree the verdict in Mr. Reid’s case comes down to a single cigarette butt. I think there’s a lot more to consider than that. But for the purposes of this post, we’ll just agree to disagree.

But more importantly is the distinction he makes between “guilty beyond reasonable doubt” and “guilty beyond ANY doubt.” As he points out, in order to find a person guilty of a crime, the jury or judge must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the person committed said crime. That’s true of all crimes, including murder.

Here’s the question I pose to you all: Should it be a higher standard for death penalty cases? Should a prosecutor be required to eliminate, as Mortimer suggests, ALL doubt of a person’s guilt before finding him/her guilty of a crime for which they could receive the death penalty? Or is the current system (which I go over a bit in this post) effective?

And here’s another question to ponder: Is it even possible to eliminate ALL doubt of a person’s guilt?

What say you, readers?

The state’s case by the numbers

It’s official. At 3:55 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 12, 2009, prosecutor Jeff Terronez wrapped up his case against Elijah Reid. Within a few minutes, defense attorneys Stephen Richards and William Schick began their case.

With the state’s case in the bag, I offer you all a handy, bulleted, by-the-numbers look back at the state’s case.

• Days of testimony: Well, that’s actually kind of a tough question. The first day (Jan. 5) was actually only about 90 minutes. The following day, the trial wrapped at 11:30 a.m. because lawyers had previous engagements to attend. Then days 3 and 4 were full days. So for week one, we got about 2 1/2 full days. With testimony for the state wrapping up at about 4 p.m. Jan. 12, that means there were two full days of testimony during week two. All told, I’d say it’s about 4 1/2 days total.
• Witnesses called: This one is easier. Jeff Terronez called 31 witnesses.
• Exhibits presented: Keep in mind that I’m counting each part of a group exhibit (that is, an exhibit with several pieces) as separate exhibits. All told, Mr. Terronez presented 138 exhibits.

There you go, folks. That’s a quick rundown of the state’s case. Stay tuned. The defense began its case Tuesday and could wrap up Wednesday. So be sure to check www.qconline.com for updates. And you’re welcome to follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/bill_mayeroff. I post a lot of updates there, too.

Week 1 wrap-up

Well, folks, we’ve made it to the end of week 1 of Elijah Reid’s trial. First and foremost, I want to thank everyone for reading and commenting. This blog got huge really quickly and I’m glad you all seem to be enjoying it.

On to business. Week 1 was amazingly busy. Though there were really only about 3 days of testimony, a ton happened. With that in mind, here’s a handy wrap-up of the first week.

Day 1 – Monday, Jan. 4, 2010

What happened: Jury selection begins. 28 potential jurors, split into two groups of 14, were interviewed, as part of a group and individually, by lawyers on both sides and Judge Braud. Six jurors from the first group are seated and the second group yields three.

Evidence: None.

Witnesses: None

Day 2 – Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2010

What happened: Though the second day of jury selection was supposed to start at 8:30 a.m., nothing happened until 10:05 a.m. I’m not really sure why. The remaining three jurors and one alternate are picked from the first group of 14 jurors questioned. After lunch, eight more potentials are called and the remaining two alternates are picked. A full jury is finally seated at 3:24 p.m.

Opening arguments began at 4:05 p.m. with a warning from Jeff Terronez.

“What I expect that you’re going to hear is that a number of my witnesses either use or deal drugs,” he said. “These witnesses weren’t necessarily the most cooperative with police in this investigation.”

He was quick to remind jurors they had all said in their interviews that they would give as much weight to the testimony of drug users and dealers as they would to any other witnesses.

The two victims were also involved with drugs, Mr. Terronez told the jury.

“You’re going to hear that Jermaine Robinson and Ryan Ferry went to a location in Rock Island to conduct a drug transaction,” he said.

William Schick, Mr. Reid’s attorney, agreed that some of the state’s witnesses were involved with drugs, but he pained a less-rosy picture of them.

“All the main witnesses the state is going to put on have criminal records to challenge their credibility,” he said. “My client knew nothing about any robbery, any armed robbery.”

One witness took the stand before things wrapped up at about 5:30 p.m.

Who testified: Rock Island police officer Ryan Barnett told jurors he was the first officer to arrive on the scene of the murders. “Basically, I noticed two people in the vehicle – the driver and a front-seat passenger,” he said. “Neither of them appeared to be moving, but they appeared to have their eyes open.”

Evidence: None.

Day 3 – Wednesday, Jan. 6, 2010

What happened: Because of “previous engagements,” this was an early day, wrapping up just before 11:30 a.m. That said, enough happened. Jurors heard from another officer who responded to the scene after Officer Barnett. They also heard that two $20 bills, one of which was bloody, were found outside a house near the scene. A resident of the area near the crime scene testified that she called 911 when she discovered Mr. Ferry and Mr. Robinson in the car. Jurors also heard from a woman who lived in the area and said she heard gunshots, as well as a criminalist for the Rock Island Police Department. The criminalist, Mary Devine, did not finish testifying Wednesday.

Who testified:

• Rock Island police officer Brett Buchen said he found the bloody $20 bill.

• Latira Lee said she discovered Mr. Robinson and Mr. Ferry in the car and called 911. “I seen the black gentleman’s face real swollen. There was blood running from his nose,” she said, adding that she didn’t see any blood on Mr. Ferry.
• Leslie Solis said she heard gunshots shortly before the two men were found.
• Rock Island police criminalist Mary DeVine said she processed the evidence from the scene. She said she also examined the bodies of Mr. Ferry and Mr. Robinson.

Evidence:

• Seven photographs showing the intersection of 7th St. and 13th Ave., a house at 602 13th Ave and two $20 bills found outside the house.
• An aerial photograph showing where the murders occurred.
• Four photos of the black van Latira Lee said came to the scene and that she had seen previously at Century Woods apartment complex.
• The $20 bills found outside of 602 13th Ave.
• Photos of Mr. Robinson and Mr. Ferry taken before their deaths.
• Photos of the inside of the rear of Mr. Ferry’s red Oldsmobile Intrigue. In one of the photos, the bodies of the two men, in the front seat,  are partially visible.

Day 4 – Thursday, Jan. 7, 2010

What happened: It was the first full day of testimony. Jurors heard the rest of the testimony of Mary DeVine, as well as testimony from friends of Mr. Robinson and Mr. Ferry. Dr. Mark Peters, who performed the autopsies, also took the stand.

Who testified:

• Mary DeVine, criminalist for the Rock Island Police Department, whose testimony began on day 3. She spoke of finding bloody bills in the car where Mr. Robinson and Mr. Ferry were shot.
• Dr. Mark Peters, forensic pathologist who performed autopsies on Mr. Robinson and Mr. Ferry. He said either of two gunshots could have killed Mr. Robinson and that Mr. Ferry was killed by a shot that transected his brain stem.
• Rock Island police Detective Sean Roman told jurors he found $160 in $20 bills, some of them blood-stained, when he searched jeans belonging to Mr. Reid. Early on April 16, 2008, police executed a search warrant on an apartment at 1351 3rd St., Rock Island, where Mr. Reid was staying with his girlfriend Teresa Simmons and several children.
• Kendal Tomlinson, Mr. Ferry’s girlfriend, testified she began to suspect he was using cocaines in the weeks before his death.
• Kelly Wood, a friend of Mr. Ferry’s, said he smoked marijuana and used crack cocaine with Mr. Ferry. He said he knew Mr. Ferry sold marijuana, but did not think he sold crack or cocaine.
• Paul Hesse, a friend of Mr. Ferry’s, said he knew Mr. Robinson to be a drug dealer and did not like that Mr. Ferry was hanging around with him.
• Michael Watson, a friend of Mr. Robinson’s, said he never knew Mr. Robinson sold crack.
• Brooke Hawkins, a former girlfriend of Mr. Robinson’s, said he carried “ridiculous amounts” of money with him. “I told him, ‘Somebody’s going to try to get that money from you.’”

Evidence:

• Several photos of the interior and exterior of Mr. Ferry’s Oldsmobile Intrigue.
• Money recovered from the same car.
• Clothing, much of it blood-stained, worn by both victims the night they were killed.
• Bullet fragments recovered from both victims.
• Body diagrams and photos from the victims’ autopsies.
• Photos of a Ford Regency van allegedly driven by Mr. Reid the night of the murders.
• Photos of Mr. Reid’s apartment.
• Blood-stained bills found in the apartment.
• A revolver, allegedly used in the murders, recovered from a sewer in August 2009.

Day 5 – Friday, Jan. 8, 2010

What happened: Jurors got their first testimony from someone claiming to have been with Mr. Reid the night of the murders. They also heard from a girlfriend of Mr. Robinson.

Who testified:

• Jennifer Myrick: The girlfriend of Jermaine Robinson told jurors how her boyfriend was planning to buy 500 grams of cocaine from a man she called “Elijah” for a price of $13,000. She testified that she was worried someone was setting him up to be robbed.
• Terrell Aaron: Testified that Mr. Reid talked about robbing Mr. Robinson the night of April 11, 2008. He also said that Mr. Reid said bragged about how he “killed them n—–.” But on cross-examination, attorney Stephen Richards pointed out Mr. Aaron’s testimony varied from testimony he gave during a deposition on July 2, 2009.

Evidence: Nothing new was admitted. But jurors got another look at the revolver allegedly used in the murder.

What’s next

Stephen Richards didn’t finish his cross-examination of Terrell Aaron, so that will wrap up at 9 a.m. Monday, Jan. 11. Also slated to testify are Carter McCray and Jamil Stewart, who were supposedly with Mr. Reid the night of the murders.

Meet the jury

If you saw them on the street, you probably wouldn’t look twice at any of them. They look like — and are, in most respects — 12 ordinary people.

But those 12 ordinary people, in mere weeks, could find themselves making some very big decisions. They are the jurors — eight women and four men — who may ultimately decide three things: whether Elijah Reid is guilty or innocent of the murders of Jermaine Robinson and Ryan Ferry, whether he is eligible to receive the death penalty for those murders and whether he will be sentenced to death.

The 12 jurors — and three alternates — were culled from a list of 136 potentials.  Following is some information about each, gleaned from  group and individual interviews the lawyers and Judge Braud conducted. Some were asked more questions than others and some volunteered more information than others.

The first juror seated is a hairdresser from East Moline who said she has no kids. She drew some questions when it was revealed that Assistant Rock Island County State’s Attorney Norma Kauzlarich was a client of hers, as well as a family friend. She is also a relative (though not a close one) of Gustavo Dominguez, who was one of two people charged with the April, 2008 murder of Katherine Pedigo of Moline (Mr. Dominguez was found mentally unfit for trial in November, 2009). The juror said she was not terribly close to either Ms. Kauzlarich or Mr. Dominguez and that those affiliations would not affect her judgement in this case. The lawyers obviously agreed.

Juror 2 didn’t say much during either group or individual interviews. The man is a Moline resident who said he works on Arsenal Island. He wasn’t any more specific about his work, but did say he has two daughters and enjoys watching football and baseball.

The third juror seated is a pharmacy technician who enjoys bowling. Another quiet juror, she said she’s fairly neutral about the death penalty during her interview. The mother of three said one of her children is in the military, though she didn’t say which branch.

Three of the four male jurors came from the first group interviewed, including juror 4. This 48-year-old was probably the best-dressed potential juror (he was the only one who showed up in a shirt and tie), and was also one of the quietest. All he really revealed about himself during the interviews was a love of fishing and that he thinks the death penalty is appropriate for some, but not all, murders.

This brings us to juror 5. A resident of Illinois City, she taught 4th grade for years, but became a photographer after retiring. Though she’s been summoned for jury duty several times, this will be her first time actually serving on a jury. Though she said she was “mostly” against the death penalty, she was quick to add that there are certain situations where it might be warranted.

Juror 6 is the third of four male jurors and the last selected from the first group. An older gentleman who plays guitar, he provided one of the highlights of jury selection, at least in my mind. During his individual interview, Stephen Richards said, “You describe yourself as honest, hardworking and dependable,” referring to a question on the juror’s questionnaire. “Sounds like a Boy Scout, doesn’t it,” he replied as the courtroom cracked up.

The seventh juror seated is the first selected from the second group of 14. Another retiree, he works at the Quad City International Airport part-time. In his free time, he goes bowling and plays golf. He was also the last male juror selected.

Like juror 1, juror 8 drew some questions for some people she is associated with. She told lawyers and Judge Braud that her niece was convicted of murder-for-hire in Henry County years ago. She said the conviction would not affect her judgment in this case. This mother of four also has 10 grandkids and is a retired banker.

Juror number 9 also works on Arsenal Island doing operations research. One of the younger jurors (she was in her 30s, while many of the others ranged in age from the upper 40s into the 60s), she spends her free time bowling and playing pool.

Juror 10 was the first selected on day 2. As a quick side note, Judge Braud made sure the second day of jury selection moved quicker than the first, so potential jurors were asked fewer questions. Back to juror 10. She didn’t talk much about her personal life, except to say she’s a mother of six and a bus driver for the Riverdale school district.

The 11th juror seated is a 60-year-old from Moline. She drew some questions from Jeff Terronez because she said she’s a fan of the TV show Law and Order and Mr. Terronez wanted to make sure she knew the show was not a realistic portrayal of the judicial system. Besides watching Law and Order, juror 11 also collects pottery and knits.

The 12th and final juror works in Augustana College’s office of advancement. She has no grandkids, but says her three dogs fill that void.

Meet the alternates

With 12 jurors seated, we come now to the three alternates. Normally, only one or two are selected, but because the trial is going to be very long and because it involves the complex issue of the death penalty, Judge Braud wanted to have three.

Alternate 1 drew some discussion from the lawyers while they were considering her because she said on her questionnaire that she supported the death penalty for most murder cases. But when questioned by Mr. Richards, she convinced him that she would look at all the facts before deciding whether the death penalty is appropriate.

Alternate 2 is a 43-year-old supervisor in a machine shop. Aside from work, he said he likes watching the History Channel on TV, especially shows where it shows how things were built.

The final alternate describes herself as the outdoorsy type. When she’s not working at Hy-Vee in Milan, she likes camping and watching football.

And that, folks, is your look at Elijah Reid’s jury. 15 ordinary people, 12 of whom will be making some very big decisions in the coming weeks.

A quick, unrelated side note: You’re all invited to follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/bill_mayeroff. I’ll be posting updates on Twitter during breaks in the trial action, as well as when I post an entry here. I’d also suggest following the official Twitter feed of the Dispatch/Argus at http://twitter.com/dispatch_argus. You’ll get all sorts of news updates throughout the day.

Meet the characters

With Elijah Reid’s trial about to begin, I figured the time was right to introduce you to the major characters. I’ll be talking about them a lot both here and in my daily coverage of the trial, which can be found at www.qconline.com. Anyway, without further ado, I present the cast of principal characters.

Elijah Reid: Mr. Reid   was arrested April 16, 2008 outside his home in the Century Woods apartments at 1351 3rd St., Rock Island. He is accused of killing Jermaine O. Robinson, 30, and Ryan J. Ferry, 22, who were both found shot to death in a car in Rock Island on April 11, 2008. Police said he may have known Mr. Robinson and Mr. Ferry, but did not say how.

During the course of his trial, mental health professionals have determined Mr. Reid’s IQ to be 65, which means he may, by law, be considered mentally retarded and declared ineligible for the death penalty. The law, however, states that a judge may consider other factors in making that determination. During hearings in December, Judge Walter Braud ruled that he is not retarded, stating that many of his academic problems can be traced back to very bad eyesight.

Jermaine O. Robinson: Described by former girlfriend Brooke Hawkins as very generous, Mr. Robinson attended Rock Island High School for three years before moving to Louisiana and finishing high school there. His grandmother, Lucy Pierson, said he took good care of her and would not hesitate to drop whatever he was doing to help her out. Ms. Hawkins said he was also a trained barber and owned a shop in Louisiana, but did not cut hair regularly.

Ryan J. Ferry: A memorial Web page on Myspace.com said Mr. Ferry was a Moline High School graduate with two children. The page also said he likes to hunt and fish.

Judge Walter D. Braud: Since becoming a circuit judge in 2001, Judge Braud has overseen several of the Quad-Cities’ biggest criminal trials, including that of Cory Gregory, who pleaded guilty in 2006 for his role in the murder of Adrienne Reynolds. More recently, the soft-spoken Judge Braud presided over the trial of Henry Sims, who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in June, 2009, after pushing his girlfriend, Erin Waeyaert, off the running board of a van, killing her. Judge Braud sentenced Mr. Sims to 16 years.

Soft-spoken but tough, Judge Braud is very meticulous in everything he does. He won’t hesitate to send a jury out of a courtroom if he feels something is about to be said that they should not hear. When he’s handing down a sentence, he will explain exactly why he chose that particular sentence, often using very blunt language. When sentencing Henry Sims, for example, he said, “You have not lived a good life. You are not the worst person in the world, but you are close.”

Rock Island County State’s Attorney Jeff Terronez: Mr. Terronez was elected the State’s Attorney in 2004. Less than two years after being elected, he prosecuted the case of Sarah Kolb, one of the people accused in the 2005 murder of Adrienne Reynolds.

Though his perfectly coordinated shirt-and-tie combinations may imply otherwise, Mr. Terronez is always relaxed in court. He’s often found seated with his chair tilted back and his legs crossed. And he tries to make sure others are as relaxed as he is. During individual questioning of potential jurors in Elijah Reid’s trial, he would start off each bout of questions with a joke – often about the potential juror being “in the hot seat” or expecting spotlights to start shining as in the game show Who Wants to Be a Millionaire. Though the reference may be a tad dated, it seemed to make the potential jurors laugh.

According to his Web site, as State’s Attorney, Mr. Terronez is the “chief legal advisor” for the county government.

Assistant Rock Island County State’s Attorney Mark Senko: Mr. Senko is the newest addition to this trial’s cast. He replaced Assistant State’s Attorney Heidi Weller in December after she withdrew for personal reasons.

Mr. Senko is a big man, both in size and personality. Mr. Senko is often smiling and cracking jokes with whoever will listen. But during trial, he’s all business, firing off questions very quickly. During the June, 2009 trial of Henry Sims, on which he was one of the co-prosecutors, a courtroom demonstration nearly earned a mistrial. Mr. Senko, during his cross-examination of Mr. Sims, threw a set of keys in Mr. Sims’ direction. Judge Braud quickly told Mr. Senko not to do it again and Mr. Senko later apologized to Mr. Sims and the jury.

Defense attorney William G. Schick: Mr. Schick is perhaps the polar opposite of Mr. Senko and Mr. Terronez. One of two lawyers on Mr. Reid’s legal team, Mr. Schick is as laid-back and soft-spoken as Mr. Terronez and Mr. Senko are boisterous. Most recently, Mr. Schick defended Mitchell Laabs against a murder charge in July, 2009. Mr. Laabs, of East Moline, was accused of shooting a man named Darrell Little on May 31, 2007 and was found guilty in July, 2009.

Defense attorney Stephen Richards: Mr. Richards would not be among this cast of characters if the death penalty was not on the table. The Chicago-based attorney, according to his Web site, was certified as a capital case counsel by the Illinois Supreme Court in 2001. His presence, or the presence of another certified capital case counsel, is required by state law.

His Web site says he has been involved in “hundreds” of death penalty cases, including the case of one of the defendants in the 1993 Palatine (Illinois) Brown’s Chicken shooting. The defendant, the site says, was sentenced by a jury to life in prison rather than death.

There you have it, folks. That’s a basic rundown of the major players in this trial. Remember: Make sure to keep your eyes on this blog and at www.qconline.com for all the latest coverage of the trial.

Jury selection

With jury selection in Elijah Reid’s murder case underway, I figured the time was right to talk about that particular process. The fact that this is a death penalty case makes even jury selection more of a task.

Let me start by taking you through the steps of jury selection during a normal trial (thanks to Rock Island County State’s Attorney Jeff Terronez for talking to me about some of the technicalities).

1. A list of potential jurors is created. According to the Web site of the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Court Administrator, the list comes from Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White. Mr. White’s office gathers names from voter registration, driver’s license and state ID card records. A random sampling of those names is selected by Rock Island County and those are the potential jurors.
2. Potential jurors are issued a summons, generally about five weeks before the date they are expected to report.
3. On the day they report, the potential jurors go to the Rock Island County courthouse where they are questioned by both prosecuting and defense attorneys, as well as the judge presiding over the trial. They are asked about their background, what they have heard or read about the case and, according to Mr. Terronez, “their knowledge of the system and their perceived knowledge of the system.”
4. After questioning, a group of 12 jurors and one or two alternates is selected. The alternates are there in case any of the jurors become unable to serve after the trial has started.

The normal process generally takes between a couple hours and a full business day, but more often than not, testimony begins on the same day jurors are selected. Not so in Elijah Reid’s trial.

The big difference in this case is that the lawyers and Judge Walter Braud decided to throw an extra step into the process. Potential jurors who reported on Dec. 28 were given questionnaires to fill out. Mr. Terronez said the reason they decided to use the questionnaire is because the jury pool — 136 people split into two groups of 68 — was larger than most and in addition to questioning them about the trial, they have to be questioned about how they feel about the death penalty. Mr. Terronez wouldn’t talk specifically about what was on the questionnaire when I asked him about it, but he said the information would be useful next week when in-person questioning begins.

Here are the steps of Elijah Reid’s jury selection process:

1. 136 potential jurors are issued a summons and report to the Rock Island County courthouse on Dec. 28. Not all of them report at once, instead coming in two groups of 68.
2. The first group of potentials fills out the questionnaires, hands them to a bailiff and leaves.
3. The second group fills out the questionnaires, hands them to a bailiff and leaves.
4. Mr. Terronez, co-prosecutor Mark Senko and Mr. Reid’s attorneys William G. Schick and Stephen Richards will compile the answers over the course of Dec. 29 and 30. Though he could not say for sure, Mr. Terronez said it was possible that some jurors could be eliminated based on their answers.
5. Potentials that are not eliminated will again report back to the courthouse on Jan. 4 for questioning by the lawyers and Judge Braud.
6. After questioning, the parties will select 15 people — 12 jurors and three alternates. That number, Mr. Terronez said, is determined by the judge and varies from case to case. In this case, he said, Judge Braud felt more alternates were necessary.

As you can tell, this process is going to take a while. Though in-person questioning will start Jan. 4, Mr. Terronez did not know when testimony would begin because he had no way of knowing how long it would take to get 15 suitable people.

There you have it. By the way, keep your browser pointed at this blog and at www.qconline.com for coverage of the trial. I’ll be sitting in on everything starting Jan. 4 and I’ll be able to go into more specific detail about how the jury selection process is working. Plus, I’ll be writing stories for QCOnline.com and the print edition every day of the trial. So stay tuned.