Flamenco

Spanish guitars -- battling between strings trying to tell two or three opposing stories that converge into one harmony, one novel.

Gypsies join in and wail their laments into the hollow wood -- echoing the sadness of their plight. Occasionally their cries create the same pain in the audience. The spectator feels uncomfortable listening to the sounds and sobs of the singers. One wonders if they aren't really in physical pain during their performance, so visceral.

One by one dancers come out and their shoes clap the wooden floors beneath their feet. Twists and turns of the body - hand gestures followed by finger snaps or hand clapping to accompany the competing guitars.

Serious faces on the dancers. Hair slicked into chignons held tight with small sparkly brushes. Fake flowers embrace their heads either beneath, below or to the sides of the bases of their skulls.

Tight topped blouses or dresses, some enhanced with fringe. Skirts that are equally tight but that flow out on the bottom so that the dancers can pick them up while they pound the floor boards like pistons on a steam train.

When they let their skirts down, tiers of asymmetrical ruffles brush the stage as they exit. Only to return to blasting applause and thundering bravos.

All Over the World

What I've noticed in many of my travels is that not matter where you are or where you go, some things are the same.

*The purest and most adorable form of any language comes from children between the ages of 3 and 7. It sounds so sweet with few, if any, slang words, mumblings or cut off endings. Case in point at the airport in Madrid, I heard a French speaking brother and sister discussing the fabulousness of an ice popsicle in the heat. I also overheard a Spanish speaking boy beg his mother endearingly to get him some candy because it would make him feel special.

*Beggars always feel like getting in your face or interrupting your personal space is the best way to get your charity. I am not sure where this habit was learned. Needless to say, I find it annoying when they do this and I am far less likely to give them any money whatsoever.

*At airport boarding gates, regardless of what instructions are given, people line up and crowd to get into the plane. If the crew tells them to wait for a certain group or or row number, somehow people who have no seat anywhere near that section line up to get on the place. This delays the boarding process yet it happens all the same.

*Trinket and souvenir shops in other countries are intriguing beyond belief. Even when you think they are ridiculous and wasteful things in your own country, Somehow if they are in another country, they are exotic and cool. Despite my saying this, I still come home with so many of these things!

Physical Therapy - Conclusion

The end of an era finally arrived. After three months of continuous physical therapy, Angie's sessions were coming to an end. The last three sessions confirmed that there was no more pain for Angie but still enormous stiffness and tightness.

Last week’s sessions were overseen by Shayna who was taking over for Lily while she was on vacation. Shayna gave Angie some new stretches and exercises to do – many of which included the use of a foam roller. Angie had to use the foam roller to assist in stretching out her rib muscles and her shoulder muscles. Although it was painful to use the foam roller at first, the benefit was immediate. As Shayna worked on Angie’s back, it became apparent that her back was still overcompensating for the tightness in her mid back. Although she was no longer in pain, her shoulder on one side and her lower back on the opposite end were very tight. Shayna warned Angie that she had to be very cautious because this type of tightness could re-activate the pain she felt when she originally came into physical therapy.

Angie knew this was the case as Lily had told her the same thing. Angie wasn’t really sure what to do as she was still doing all her exercises and stretches at home. She couldn’t really pinpoint what was creating all this tension in her back. If only there were some kind of magical mailing that would arrive to tell Angie the exact thing that exacerbated her back trouble. But alas, there was none yet.

Lily showed Angie some new stretches as well. She gave her some new variations to exercises she was already doing. These variations would be more challenging and would aid in strengthening the specific spots that still needed improvement.

At the end of the session, Lily provided Angie with some additional exercises and stretches to what she was already doing. She also gave Angie a sheet on ankle exercises because Angie often complained of wobbliness in her ankles. They hugged and said goodbye.

As much as they said they will keep in touch, Angie hoped it was more as friendship than as a physical therapist to patient. The future remains to be seen but this concludes the saga of Angie’s back pain and treatment. Thank you all for your devotion to the soap opera.

Jury Deliberations and the Verdict

We selected the foreperson immediately upon entering the juror room. We then decided to start fresh the next day.

Upon leaving the courthouse, I knew exactly where I stood on the second count. I felt that the government did a very good job of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had violated this act. The charge explained what I had already known so nothing new was added to my decision in that regard.

When I went home, I re-read the charge around the first count of conspiracy and the legal language confused me. As it was I wasn’t entirely sure that the prosecution was as convincing on that count; now the charge just befuddled me more.

The next day everyone was just as confused as I was on the first count. We asked the judge for clarification as well as witness testimony transcripts to go over pieces of the case. We read the charge aloud and most of us were confused by it. I think at that moment a lot of us wanted to say the defendant was not guilty on the first count because the burden of proof by the prosecution had not been met in our eyes. After hours of discussion, we took a count. 4 people felt he was guilty and 8 felt he wasn’t. I was one of the ones who thought he was not guilty mostly because I didn’t believe the evidence showed he knowingly participated in the conspiracy.

That night I had trouble sleeping. I really had to follow the advice the judge had given us. If I were in the defendant’s shoes, what would I do? What would I be thinking? And I realized that I wouldn’t be in the defendant’s shoes. I would never have handed over that money as was seen in the video. No matter who was asking me, I wouldn’t have gotten into that car and driven across state lines. There was no denying that he was caught red handed in that video and therefore he was guilty in my eyes. It didn’t matter how much he knew before the money drop or during the drive. The fact was he delivered the money and that’s it.

When we returned the next day, there was a change in the air. We took a vote and it was now 6-6. We circled the table to explain our ideas and/or changes of opinion. I do not know if it changed anyone’s mind or not. By lunchtime, we didn’t seem any closer to a decision on the first count. We spent the morning deciding the second count and that was a little more straightforward.

After lunch, we asked the judge to explain one more bit of legal language and that made all the difference. Once she elucidated, we had the answer in our hands. We returned to the juror room and took another vote. It was unanimous. The defendant was guilty on both counts brought against him.

I can’t say that I felt good about my decision. I certainly didn’t want to go into jury duty to come out finding someone guilty of any crime. I do feel that justice was served though because we discussed and repeated every aspect of the charges in such detail. It became maddening at many points – just going over pieces of evidence, transcripts and the charge over and over.

What I learned, aside from due process and how the system works, is that you have to watch what you do in this day and age. Phones are traced and video cameras are everywhere. It’s important to do what you think is right. If there is any doubt, then you should not do it. Overall, it was a very valuable experience and I would do it again. Now I just have to wait another six years before I get another jury summons.

The Trial – The Charge

When all the witnesses were questioned and the lawyers had completed their show, the judge contributed her part to the trial. She handed out the charge. This document explained the details of both of the counts on which the defendant was charged. It was 46 pages long – a small term paper by my standards.

Each of the counts was explained in both legal language and more day-to-day parlance. She read the charge to us and then we were sent to deliberate. We selected out foreperson and then decided to reconvene the next morning.

The charge in itself was super confusing. What was stated in the legal language seemed to be the opposite of what was explained in straightforward language. I actually read the charge 5 times from the moment we got it until we reached a verdict. Seriously, I felt like I was reading some of the philosophical texts in my college days - reading and re-reading in order to come to an understanding. Needless to say, it was one of the reasons why it took us so long to come to a verdict.

The Trial – The Witnesses

The first person the prosecution sent to the witness stand was the Drug Enforcement Agency’s Case Director. He explained how he was one of the undercover agents for a particular ring of drug trafficking/money laundering. He explained the basics of the undercover arrangement and then proceeded to show us a video of the particular night in question. The video showed the money drop in question. The defendant had no knowledge of the surveillance equipment because the video recorder was hidden from his view.

We also heard recordings and read transcripts of many conversations that happened around the particular money drop in question and others that seemed to be tied to this incident. Under cross examination by the defense, it became clear that a number of methods used in the investigation were sketchy or incomplete. This was something the defense questioned for every witness.

The second witness was an officer who was part of the surveillance effort that tracked the defendant from the money drop back to his place of residence. He explained what happens in general on car surveillance and how many cars track the ‘target’ (the person they are following) and then what happened on the respective night. The defense also tore him down in questioning. I watched a lot of this part of the trial as if I were watching a tennis match – fast serve from the lawyer and even speedier return from the witness.

The next two witnesses were cooperating witnesses (CW). They were arrested for committing crimes and their testimony could be used to lower their sentencing although that wasn’t a guarantee. The first CW seemed to be the master mind of the whole drug trafficking and money laundering ring. He explained how the money laundering worked. All of his testimony was translated by a court interpreter. I found this part fascinating because I was ensuring that the court interpreter was capturing each thing exactly as the witness was saying it and not making any changes. I was satisfied with the translations.
The second CW was linked to the case via a cell phone. The cell phone he used made calls to the cell phone in the defendant’s car the night of the money drop in question.
We looked at cell phone invoices and agreements that 2nd CW signed under an alias (a baseball player’s name). He explained how he used the phone and that he recognized some of the phone numbers.

The fifth witness was the arresting officer. He explained how the arrest ‘went down’. He told us about how he read the defendant his Miranda rights in Spanish. And he clarified what the rights were showing in ‘layman’s terms’. The defendant then began to explain his guilt for what had happened.

The last witness was the paralegal for the prosecution. She explained how she went about gathering information for the whereabouts of the cell phones in usage. She got GPS locations for the cell phone used to do the money drop in question. I found her evidence and presentation very convincing.

As the lawyers made their closing statements, I knew how I stood on one of the two counts. The closing statements were entertaining more than revelatory. I knew I would have to make my decision based on the witnesses and their testimony and how much I credit I gave their testimony.

The Trial - Opening Statements

I should mention that prior to our being sworn in, the judge had specified that we could not talk to anyone or discuss any aspect of the trial while the trial was in progress. No postings on the internet and certainly no research on the internet or anywhere. Those outside sources would influence our verdict and we were not allowed to do any of that. She also prohibited us from talking to any of the lawyers or law enforcement people or the witnesses. She said that it’s best to ignore them as no one could tell from afar what you might be discussing. In addition, the jurors themselves were not allowed to talk about the case with each other until the trial was completed.

The judge described how the United States Government, or more correctly, the lawyers representing the government would have the burden of proof. They would have to produce all the evidence to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty of the crimes for which he was charged.

The prosecution (or the government) made their opening statements. They told us that the defendant was being charged with two items: 1) Conspiracy to Money Launder 2) Violation of the Travel Act. (Both of which was explained by the judge early on and why I decided to disclose the fact that I work in the Legal and Compliance division of my company). They explained briefly what those charges meant and that there would be 6 witnesses from whom we would be hearing testimony.

Then the defense gave their opening statement. The defense council explained that there was a lot of incompetence in the investigation and that the evidence would not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his client was guilty.

The Jury

After all the other people were shuffled out of the court room, the judge asked each individual person a number of questions: Their name, their marital status, if they had children, what they did for a living, what their spouses, children and any in-laws did for a living and their level of education and where they studied as well as where they resided.

Each person was required to respond to questions about lawsuits raised against them and what the verdicts on those cases were, if any. She pushed on to find out if they had been victims of a crime or if their family members had been. After each line of questioning, she asked if any of the individual jurors experience would make them biased in any way.

We then recessed and when we came back she asked if anyone had anything else they felt that they should disclose to the court. I raised my hand and disclosed that I worked in the legal and compliance area of my bank and in the Anti-Money Laundering division. She asked me if I thought it was fair and just that I disclosed that. I said 'yes' and she agreed.

At this point the prosecuting and defending lawyers met with the judge in private to go over which people should remain on the jury based on their answers.

After 15 minutes or so, the judge read a number of names and excused them. My name was not called. She then asked us to move over in the jury box. I became at that point juror #3,

We were all sworn in.

Jury Selection

In this courtroom, the judge introduced herself and told us a little about the case - the lawyers, the defendant, the names of the witnesses and some specific location that would be part of the case.

She asked us all if we knew these people or places. If we did, we were to raise our hands and tell her and she would asked us more questions. She proceeded to ask if anyone was or had family in law enforcement. A couple of people raised their hands and explained themselves. The judge questioned us if any of us or our family members were lawyers. Many people admitted to this and were interrogated further.

The judge queried whether anyone had been charged of a crime or was waiting for sentencing. No one answered this question. She mentioned that people could raise their hands and tell her in private. Still no one admitted to this. She continued to inquire if anyone had been part of a crime or a law suit. There were a few answers.

After each answer for each question, the judge quizzed the individual to see if their experience would hinder them from being impartial. Regardless of whatever one said or how much they tried to convince the judge they would be bad jurors, only 3 people were removed from the group as a whole.

The clerk then put everyone's summons into a basket and pulled out named. When a person's name was called, the were to line up in the jury box. The 8th name called was mine.

Jury Duty

More than a month ago I received a jury summons in the mail. This postal package would make the majority of New York City residents cringe and complain. But not I! I enjoy jury duty.

I've served jury duty a number of time in the past and I find it relaxing for a number of reasons:
1) It's a break from work
2) You spend a lot of time waiting around which is excellent reading time
3) It's fun to see how annoyed people get who are called to serve
4) Occasionally you hear how annoyed they are they tell you their life stories
5) You get a glimpse of how the judicial process works on a very small scale
6) I'm a big believer in civic duty.

As messed up as I think our justice system is at times, I'm happy that we have it. I can have an opinion and not be physically tortured by it (regardless of how I feel at specific times when it comes to the reception of my opinion).

People convene to one of the many courts in lower Manhattan and wait to potentially be called on a jury or to be dismissed after serving jury duty for a few days.

I reported to a very new court and the jury assembly room was packed. In the midst I saw someone familiar. None other than Sarah Jessica Parker. (Man, she's skinny!) Despite my wanting to tell her to eat a steak and put on some weight, I left her alone.

We all submitted our summons to the clerk and the name calling began. A round of 50-75 people (including Sarah Jessica Parker) were called up to a room. I was not included in that batch so I sat and watched Rachael Ray make a yummy lasagna.

In the next group, my name was called. Up I went with another 60 people to a court room.