I hate it when I'm right about things like this.

[elfs]

Damn, I hate it when I'm right. August 10th, 2006: Jail guard allegedly accepted offer of sex. August 31st, 2006: Jurors deadlock in jail sex trial. That's what all the negotiating over drugs and addiction was about: they were dealing with knowledge about each other's tactics in the previous trial!

Comments

[lovingboth]

Hmm, I'd find it difficult to say that what appears to have been entirely consensual sex between adults should be illegal.

If he did it, fire him, but don't criminalise him.

[elfs.livejournal.com]

Except that the guard took the job knowing it was a crime. The specific charge is "custodial sexual misconduct." The aspects here are that the guard had, or could give the impression that he had, some authority over the priveleges and punishments of the prisoners; the legislature has said that exchanging or requesting sexual favors between prisoners and guards shall be illegal. If he broke the law after volunteering to abide by it, then I'm with FallenPegasus that I'd have a hard time saying he wasn't guilty.

If you don't like the law, act to change the law. This isn't a civil rights issue since the guard voluntarily took on the burden of responsibility by accepting the job; it's not even an issue of justice, except perhaps for the prisoners from whom advantage might have been taken. It's not an issue about which I feel strongly enough to try and hang or nullify the jury, and when I realized that that was the defense's game, my gut twisted hard enough that I wanted out.

One of the jurors asked if one of the things we did when we sent people to prison was take away their right to have intimate contact during their incarceration. My answer was that, at this point in history, yes.

[lovingboth]

Jurors here take an oath not to reveal what goes on in the jury room :)