Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, April 20, 1993 TAG: 9304200053
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-2 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: Kathy Loan
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
You wouldn't think so if you listened to jurors and witnesses. Whether it's Oliver North's Contra trial or Paul William Morehead's two-day capital murder trial in Christiansburg, jurors and witnesses play dumb when asked if they've read or heard anything about the case.
Good thing we journalists develop thick skins.
Without one last week, I would have begun to question the worth of my work.
At Morehead's aborted trial, the court had called 60 prospective jurors. During questioning, about 25 of them were asked at length if they knew anything about Lorna Raines Crockett's death or whether they had any opinions about Morehead's culpability.
Almost every one of the jurors assured the court they had never heard of the case - or, if they had, their recollections of newspaper and TV accounts were vague.
Circuit Judge Kenneth Devore, who has a knack for bringing levity to what can be tense courtroom situations, was ready.
He said he has often thought "how ignorant poor old Will Rogers was - said all he knew was what he read in the newspaper."
(Thanks, Judge.)
The most any prospective juror remembered vividly was seeing Stuart Arbuckle's story on "Current Affair." They knew he'd been a pizza manager, made a night deposit, called police on a cellular phone when he was almost held up, then lost his job.
But they weren't sure what it was all about.
And, no, no one had any interest in the outcome of the case, knew anybody directly involved or . . .
Oh, please!
Even a Montgomery County jail inmate managed to get a media dig in.
"I wasn't much of a news-watcher. I'm still not," he testified.
Those answers could have been downright insulting to those of us who have lived with the story of Lorna Crockett's death and Arbuckle's heroism. If we didn't have thick skins.
There have been about 40 stories about the Crockett case in this newspaper alone. Add to that the three other local newspapers and TV coverage, and you have to wonder whether half the jurors were hiding under rocks for the past 10 months.
But being called for jury duty is nerve-wracking, I know. Maybe prospective jurors thought they were being honest. My guess was that they were too literal or careful when interpreting lawyers' questions.
I mean, everybody was asked what they knew about this case, not any other.
A turn of events the second day of the trial bore that out.
Turns out a juror selected to hear the case was related to a victim of a Pulaski robbery Morehead is charged with committing.
Well, I wonder if the juror found out about that from reading the paper?
I hope so.
Kathy Loan covers police and courts for the New River Valley Bureau of the Roanoke Times & World-News.
by CNB