Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but paid users have great benefits. Paid member benefits:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2024 SX, MX, and SMX series (regularly $30).
How critical is jury selection in a circumstantial evidence case for the prosecution,in larger cases like this involving double homicides? Do you think that jury selection plays more of a larger role then the actual circumstantial evidence in the case does,in terms of getting a conviction?
One cannot generalize either way. Both are important.
Jury selection is always very important in any case.
The choice of where your jury pool comes from is a big factor in some cases. In the Simpson case, the LA DA's office is said by some to have made a huge error by charging in LA rather than OC. In LA the jury pool in general may have much more distrust of the police than the more conservative pool in OC. They are said to have recognized that at the start , but decided to go into LA anyway.
The jury you get is largely beyond the control of the lawyers. Sure there are premptory challenges, but the number is limited. The challenges for cause are hard to win in many cases. What this means is if the pool is bad for you, you can maybe make it a little better, but you still have a bad pool.
The kind of case can figure into this as well. In a cop who shoots a kid case (cop is the defendant), a jury from downtown LA is worse for the defense. In a white collar case that is really a business dispute, a jury from OC is good for the defense.
A circumstantial case is harder for a prosecutor to win. That said, if skillfully handled, and the facts are there (good or many little ones), convictions follow in a lot of circumstantial only cases.
The end result is always the copmposite of the interplay of many different factors, not just one. In different cases the weights one might give to various factors changes.
This is a people system: in some situations you can try an identical case in front of different juries and get vastly different results. That is sometimes very scary for both sides.
There was a lot of “motive” evidence presented, little of it is real, however. Goodwin could not have benefited from Mickey’s death, only family members could have. That’s why they ceased on this “rage” angle. When it is all said and done---all the real evidence compiled, Goodwin’s motive would have been to hire a body guard for Mickey when Mickey reported death threats that weren’t from Goodwin. Keeping Mickey alive was Goodwin’s best course. He had already put up more than $800,000 to pay the $726,000 judgment. While there was absolutely no reason for Goodwin to wanted to kill Mickey’s wife, Trudy, there were supposed to be two shooters. Why would anyone wanting to take out Mickey hire two shooters? The theory advanced at trial, that Goodwin wanted Mickey to see Trudy die, doesn’t pass the smell test by any stretch. The real evidence of who was actually at the murder scene is not clear, as prosecutors put forth, but very convoluted. Not even the race of the shooters is certain as some witnesses saw white men. This is why Goodwin has requested that the DNA collected from the murder scene be tested for ethnicity, not possible with methods in use when he was convicted in 2006. Although everyone, the court, law enforcement, Mickey’s family and others have all said they want to get the actual murderers, there is no on-going investigation and the court has refused to re-test the DNA. Talk about not passing the smell test!!
On legal professionals who have looked at this: it is true that EVERY legal professional that I know of who looked at this have said he was wrongfully convicted. Perhaps there are many legal professionals who disagree on this, but I haven’t talked to them.
Circumstantial evidence is often as valid as physical evidence, but , in this case, much of this evidence simply isn’t real. If Goodwin ever has an appeal filed, much of this false evidence that was presented in his trial will be refuted in that appeal and, if he prevails, as he should, in a re-trial.
It was never alleged, by anyone, that he was actually at the scene. He was never connected to the murders in any way, let alone being there. Defendants rarely testify at their own trials. There are many very good reasons for this.
We appreciate your attempt to bring out questions you may have on this case. This last January marks 5 years since the conviction so many questions remain. I suggest you watch Justice On Trial (www.JusticeOnTrial.org) for updates. I’ve not been working on the website for a long while due to other commitments; this is a non-profit and it has defined this term. I will be updating it in the next few weeks with public information.
We appreciate your comment on the extraordinary length of time that has elapsed between the conviction and the appeal. It is an outrage. Goodwin attempted to replace the appellate attorney in 2010 but the court refused to do so. Go figure!
The Shop
As you well know, one does not retry a case on appeal. In the areas where there was fact finding, the clearly erroneous/abuse of discretion standard bars that. There are a host of other areas that could result in a new trial.
The last comment I'll make here (and will then go watch some drag racing and prepare for the SX tonight) is that many defendants do indeed testify at their trials. Sometimes there are reasons not to (such as a confession or a really bad prior bad act that might come in). MG (and his wife, I believe) did have a bank fraud felony conviction (from bogus loan applications, I think) that would have come out had he testified, but in a murder case that would not have been enough for me to suggest he not testify to make the exact points that you do in your recent post. There is nothing more compelling than an articulate defendant saying "I did not do this crime...."
Yes, they were cross-examined but Ms. Saris, the defense attorney was up against Mr. Dixon, the top prosecutor and Alan Jackson, now running for L.A.D.A., largely due to the Mike Goodwin conviction, if you believe the video ads that are being run on his behalf with Mickey's sister featured in them. Saris was hopelessly overwhelmed and out classed by the Dixon/Jackson team. Judge Schwartz, who presided over the case, had worked directly under Mr. Dixon for years prior to taking a seat on the bench. She would not, however, recuse herself.
I do know whereof I speak on this evidence. Much of the significant evidence used in L.A. was the same as that the prosecutors presented at the preliminary hearing in Orange County, including the Stevens, whose initial claims were far different than what they testified to in L.A. I've been through, thoroughly, the 40,000+ pages of Orange County discovery and all the defense evidence. There is ample evidence of other suspects but Judge Schwartz would not allow it. Unfortunately, Saris had based much of her case on this evidence of two separate and different scenarios of the murders that would have effectively eliminated Goodwin. In a declaration following the trial, the jury foreman, having learned of this other evidence, said that, had the jury seen that evidence, the verdict would have, most assuredly, been different. The jury feeling was, with no other suspects, "if not the defendant, then who?" As you know, this is a common jury conclusion when the only absolutely established facts are that the victims are dead. Prosecutors characterized Goodwin as a monster capable of such a crime and the jury had nowhere else to go. Goodwin WAS ruthless, conniving, hated so prosecutors didn’t have to work too hard to show that.
I don't know if you're aware of the $1 million reward that had been offered by Mickey's family. If you do not think that had an influence on what witnesses said, then there's no sense in further discussion. You know, I’m not 100% convinced Goodwin is innocent; no one knows that except him and the killers. But, I do know he was wrongly convicted. Now here’s something to mull over: Following the conviction, when asked about the $1 million reward, Mickey’s sister said, “Well, one down, two to go!” meaning that there would be no payments of the reward and that an on-going investigation to find the shooters would be conducted. There was never a provision in the reward that all those involved would have to be convicted. Nothing has happened on the continuing investigation. Zero. Goodwin recently filed a motion to have the court re-test three DNA samples from the murder scene for ethnicity since the prosecution claimed the shooters were African American but some witnesses said they were white. The court, so far, has rejected that request on the grounds that elimination of Goodwin from having been at the murder scene is irrelevant.
It becomes obvious that, rather than attempting to find the shooters, the D.A. and the court would just as soon never find them. You have to wonder why that is as well as why Goodwin’s appeal has not been filed.
Marty McFly;- What do we become assholes or something?
Yes, they were cross-examined but Ms. Saris, the defense attorney was up against Mr. Dixon, the top prosecutor and Alan Jackson, now running for L.A.D.A., largely due to the Mike Goodwin conviction, if you believe the video ads that are being run on his behalf with Mickey's sister featured in them. Saris was hopelessly overwhelmed and out classed by the Dixon/Jackson team. Judge Schwartz, who presided over the case, had worked directly under Mr. Dixon for years prior to taking a seat on the bench. She would not, however, recuse herself.
I do know whereof I speak on this evidence. Much of the significant evidence used in L.A. was the same as that the prosecutors presented at the preliminary hearing in Orange County, including the Stevens, whose initial claims were far different than what they testified to in L.A. I've been through, thoroughly, the 40,000+ pages of Orange County discovery and all the defense evidence. There is ample evidence of other suspects but Judge Schwartz would not allow it. Unfortunately, Saris had based much of her case on this evidence of two separate and different scenarios of the murders that would have effectively eliminated Goodwin. In a declaration following the trial, the jury foreman, having learned of this other evidence, said that, had the jury seen that evidence, the verdict would have, most assuredly, been different. The jury feeling was, with no other suspects, "if not the defendant, then who?" As you know, this is a common jury conclusion when the only absolutely established facts are that the victims are dead. Prosecutors characterized Goodwin as a monster capable of such a crime and the jury had nowhere else to go. Goodwin WAS ruthless, conniving, hated so prosecutors didn’t have to work too hard to show that.
I don't know if you're aware of the $1 million reward that had been offered by Mickey's family. If you do not think that had an influence on what witnesses said, then there's no sense in further discussion. You know, I’m not 100% convinced Goodwin is innocent; no one knows that except him and the killers. But, I do know he was wrongly convicted. Now here’s something to mull over: Following the conviction, when asked about the $1 million reward, Mickey’s sister said, “Well, one down, two to go!” meaning that there would be an on-going investigation to find the shooters. Nothing has happened on that. Goodwin recently filed a motion to have the court re-test three DNA samples from the murder scene for ethnicity since the prosecution claimed the shooters were African American but some witnesses said they were white. The court, so far, has rejected that request on the grounds that elimination of Goodwin from having been at the murder scene is irrelevant. It becomes obvious that, rather than attempting to find the shooters, the D.A. and the court would just as soon never find them. You have to wonder why that is as well as why Goodwin’s appeal has not been filed.
Anyway, enjoy the drag races and Supercross. Thanks so much for your comments.
In 1981, I had lost a fortune on a failed restaurant chain in Hawaii and Mike hired me to do sponsor sales and produce his TV. I did produce virtually all Supercross TV until about 1992 when Lou Seals, then owner of the “Motoworld” cable TV program, took over. I produced TV for Mickey Thompson before he and Trudy were gunned down and for his company, Mickey Thompson Entertainment Group, after the brutal murders. I did remain friends with Goodwin throughout this time.
Goodwin was charged with “making false statements on a bank application,” not “bank fraud,” as has been alleged, and wound up serving three years in federal prison. I’ve seen the transcript of that trial and do have an opinion on it but won’t go there in this forum.
We have been associated in one way or the other, since 1965, so I do know him from his concert producing days.
Although we did stay in touch, I’m not familiar with any “filming of the Great Barrier Reef.” He and his ex-wife were expert still photographers and I believe he won awards on some of his underwater photos. He did have at least one showing at a prominent gallery in Laguna Beach.
Frankly, I don’t believe his “religious conversion,” and have told him this. I have known him more than 40 years and I just don’t see it. We had to tell him to stop carrying around the Bible when there were TV cameras since it looked so disingenuous, exactly what most inmates of jails and prisons do.
My position is that I do not know if he’s innocent. Only he and the killers know that. I do know that he was wrongfully convicted at a trial that was unfair. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial and, if there is ever an appeal filed, this may come out and he may have the opportunity to show ALL the evidence to a jury, especially evidence that he did not order the murders of Mickey and Trudy Thompson.
Doesn't make him guilty, but he sure was a dick. Just sayin.
Pit Row
A key ruling in the Goodwin trial.
Deputy Public Defender Elena Saris argued Monday that Thompson was killed because of his testimony against the man convicted of murdering his nephew. Scott Campbell was thrown out of an airplane over the Pacific Ocean in 1982, and his body was never recovered. Larry Cowell was convicted of murdering him over a drug deal and is serving a life term in prison.
Thompson provided testimony that undercut Cowell's alibi at his first trial; Thompson was killed before he could testify at a retrial, ordered after an appeals court ruled that Cowell's confession had been coerced.
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/oct/17/local/me-thompson17
There's a lot more on this but there's no sense in going into it here. Suffice to say that you're right, there were many who wanted to either take Mickey out or have him taken out. Again, why on earth would any thinking person send TWO shooters to take Mickey out unless they wanted to be sure that Trudy was also murdered. You do the math on that.
yeah, i get it, your so cool you don't have to...
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-u2eMqmhJy78/Twp98upV0jI/AAAAAAAAACM/Nq6zfdnL0…
Post a reply to: Friends of Michael Goodwin - Blog