| In
Saipov Death
Trial Jurors
Decline to
Fill Out Death
or Life in
Prison So
Latter, Book
Soon
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Letter
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
March 13 - Sayfullo Saipov
after being found guilty on 28
counts now faces a penalty
phase that may result in the
death penalty for killing
eight people with a van along
the West Side Highway.
On May 4,
2022 U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New
York Judge Vernon S. Broderick
held a conference on the case
and Inner City Press live
tweeted it
here.
On January
26, Saipov was
found guilty
on all counts,
after jury
questions
about whether
he did it to
join or
advance
himself in
ISIS or not.
That will be a major
issues, along
with any
mitigation, in
the penalty
phase.
But
in the penalty phase,
on March 9 for
deliberations,
Juror 4
did not come
in, due to an
undisclosed
emergency with
a relative
(who may or
may not be in
law
enforcement).
Judge
Broderick
noted a
Federal Defenders
argument, which
Inner City
Press first
wrote about on
January 16,
2023. Inner
City Press is
preparing a booklet
about the
case. More on
Substack here
With a
replacement
Juror 4,
deliberations
started over,
including a note
with questions
about threats
to behead,
and ADX,
thread here:
OK -
now in US v
Saipov death
penalty
deliberations
- interruptus?
Judge
Broderick says
Juror 4 has an
emergency and
can't come in.
He has asked
parties if an
alternate
should be
called in.
AUSA
Houle: Did he
say he's not
coming back at
all, given the
situation of
his brother?
Judge
Broderick: My
deputy spoke
to him, he was
despondent and
said would not
be coming
back. But we
could wait and
see. I
need to check
if the
relative is in
law
enforcement
Judge
Broderick: The
relative was
just found.
AUSA
Houle: We'd
like a few
minutes, given
that context.
Judge
Broderick:
That's fine. I
took it Juror
4 was
reflecting the
seriousness of
the
communications.
That's just my
read on it.
Juror 4 in the
box is Juror
172
Judge
Broderick:
Given the
defense's
previous
arguments
[that it must
be the same 12
jurors in
liability and
death penalty
phases] I
anticipate
them moving
for a
mistrial, or a
partial
mistrial. I
want to hear
from the
parties. I'll
give you the
time that you
need
Now
AUSA Houle
says Juror 4
was called by
the NYPD and
told that his
brother had
had a heart
attack, says
the US
believes it
would be
replacement
for cause.
Judge
Broderick:
That NYPD made
the call
raises the
seriousness of
heart attack.
Juror 4 was
despondent
Judge
Broderick:
Juror 4 could
be excused for
cause, I
believe.
Waiting is
still an
option. We
have next
week, a day we
start at 11,
another Juror
1/37 not
available -
and not
available
after March 22
or 23. So,
anything else
on the first
issue?
AUSA
Houle: What is
the defense's
position? FD
Patton: We
agree. Judge
Broderick:
What do the
parties think,
in the context
of the other
issue FD
Patton: For
the reasons in
our January 16
letter, we
move for a
mistrial.
Judge
Broderick: I
deny the
motion. 3
Circuit courts
have
considered
this issue
& found
that courts
can use
alternates. I
adhere to
that. If it
comes to that
the [2d]
Circuit can
weigh in
Judge
Broderick: So,
they'll have
to start their
deliberations
anew. I'll
tell them my
instructions
on yesterday's
questions.
I'll tell
them, Start
anew.
Jury
entering! (and
alternates)
Judge
Broderick:
Juror 13/652
is now Juror
4, since Juror
4 has had a
family
emergency -
he's fine,
but
won't be
returning. Now
start again. I
have to bring
652 up to
speed on the
note
yesterday, on
lethal
injection
&
moratorium
Judge
Broderick: OK,
Juror 652 has
joined them
and they have
begun again.
So, the
waiting for
(next) notes
continues.
Watch this
feed.
OK
- at 1:19 pm,
Judge
Broderick
reading out
the first note
from the "new"
jury with
Juror 652 as
Juror 4.
Judge: We have
a note which
reads as
follow: on
non-statutory
aggravating
factor 4, is a
verbal threat
in prison an
act of
violence? Is
the threat to
behead?
Now
here in US v
Saipov
courtroom at
2:35 pm,
Federal
Defenders at
their table,
prosecutors
(and Saipov)
not in the
room. Inner
City Press,
writing a
booklet on it,
remains on the
case
Saipov
is brought
back into
courtroom;
Judge
Broderick is
reading out
loud both
sides'
proposed
answers to
juror
questions, on
beheading
threats and
how ADX
Florence super
max is run.
Judge
Broderick: So
I'll answer
no, no and you
are entitled
to consider
all the
evidence that
is before you.
So I will call
the jury out
and read the
note into the
record and
response to
each question
just after I
read it. Ms.
Rodriguez,
please get the
jury
Judge
Broderick:
This is off
the record.
Ms. Houle, you
may not see
it, but my
jeans are not
on. [He is
robed] Jury
entering!
Judge
Broderick: You
asked, is a
verbal threat
in prison a
criminal act
of violence?
The answer is
no.
Judge
Broderick: Nor
is call for
the beheading
of corrections
officers- it
is not a
criminal act
of violence.
.. You may now
return to your
deliberations.
[Jury leaves]
Judge: We will
give the
jurors the
form for lunch
orders for
Monday. Any
objection?
Parties: No
Judge
Broderick: Do
the parties
agree Ms.
Rodriguez can
call Juror 4
and tell him
he is excused,
and that we
wish his
brother well?
We will do
that. Anything
else before we
continue our
waiting?
Parties: No.
[So the wait
continues -
Inner City
Press on the
case]
Now
at 4:45 pm
Judge
Broderick asks
for Saipov to
be brought in
from the
holding cell.
Judge: I have
received a
note from the
jury, that
they are not
going to be
able to reach
a verdict
today. I take
that to mean
they want to
leave and
return Monday.
While
waiting for
jury to
confirm they
want to leave
for the day
and week,
Judge
Broderick
says, This is
probably going
to be one of
the biggest
decisions of
their lives, I
think they
just want to
take a little
time. Judge
Broderick:
They say, We
want to break.
Jury
entering!
Judge
Broderick: So,
jurors, enjoy
your day off
tomorrow.
Although it's
supposed to
rain. So maybe
watching
something
inside. See
you Monday.
Back on
February 21 members
of the
media were not
allowed into
the courtroom,
only to elsewhere in
the courtroom
where a feed
shows only
part of
the courtroom.
Inner City Press,
the first of many
media in
opposition,
wrote to Judge
Broderick,
here
Here's from
the day's
testimony,
after which
Judge
Broderick said
the press
can have a bench in the
back, thread here.
On February 22, there was a single witness, about
ADX Florence.
Thread here.
On February 28 as part of the defense
case, an expert on Central Asia testified.
Thread here.
On March 1, the defense rested its case,
sans Saipov. Inner City Press live tweeted
here
On March 3, the US Attorney's Office wrote
to Judge Broderick seeking to preclude the
defense from arguing in closing that the
jury should choose a "civilized sense of
justice" over "barbarism."
Federal Defenders also wrote it,
protesting the US' proposed verdict form
and proposed penalty-phase instructions,
and submitting its own in advance of the
charge conference set for March 6.
On March 6 at the charge conference, EDNY
cases and legislative history were argued,
thread here
On March 7, the US Attorney's Office
closing; Inner City Press was there,
thread here.
Later on March 7, the defense's closing,
and US Attorney's Office's reputtal,
resumed thread here
On March 8, after more argument, there was
the jury charge, then deliberations began
with two notes (and "no" answers). The
jury was let go after 5:30 and will resume
on March 9. March 8 thread here.
On March 13, in the afternoon it ended -
with no decision, therefore a decision not
to execute. Booklet coming - for now,
thread here:
OK- during death penalty deliberations on
Saipov, after hours of radio silence from
the jury, now prosecutors Houle &
Richmond are at the front table, Saipov
led in to the back. S
aipov is dressed in red. Still waiting for
Judge Broderick. Meanwhile, just docketed
is this: "LETTER by USA as to Sayfullo
Habibullaevic Saipov dated March 13, 2023
re: Pertinent Authorities for Any Allen
Charge Document."
The defense objects to an Allen charge
Judge Broderick takes to the bench. Judge:
There is a note from the jury, that they
are not able to reach a unanimous verdict.
It is signed by Juror 1. I would like to
hear from the parties about polling the
jury --
FD Levine: We will now file a response to
the US
Judge Broderick leaves the bench to
read the two sides' letter. Meanwhile,
from the US' letter, a case where the
judge responded "please continue your
deliberations. Approximately 1 hour later,
the jury returned a sentence of death. US
v. Fields, 483 F. 3d 313."
Now at 2:38 pm with Judge Broderick off
the bench reading the parties' Allen
charge letters after a jury note that they
could not reach unanimity, word comes that
a verdict has been reached. Seems strange.
Saipov still not back at his seat...
Update: Now Saipov *has* been brought back
in by the US Marshals. He's at defense
table, smoothing down his hair. Here comes
Judge Broderick. Judge: Mr. Saipov, can
you hear from the interpreter? Saipov:
Yes. AUSA: We are proposing polling at
this time...
AUSA: Each jurors should get a piece of
paper which asks if they believe that
further discussion could lead to a
unanimous verdict. Judge Broderick: What
about how long this jury has been out?
AUSA: There have been a lot of mitigating
and aggravating factors
FD Patton: The US is using a state
death penalty case from Louisiana, under
the habeus standard. Here, your Honor
instructed the jury, If you conclude you
are unable to reach a unanimous decision,
let me know by note. They did...
FD Patton: What is the point of polling?
Whether its 11 to 1, or six to six, the
court should not consider that. AUSA
Houle: There is also a Fifth Circuit case
that acknowledges the benefits of polling.
Judge Broderick: I consider how the charge
was formulated
Judge Broderick: I am not going to poll
the jury. I do not find it would violate
Mr. Saipov's rights. But based on the
instructions I gave them, they gave me the
same language back. And nothing indicates
that they are not fully satisfied.
[Phone rings.]
Judge Broderick: Each death penalty case
that comes after this one, each Judge is
going to have to make his or her decision
on whether to poll. Okay. My intention
would be to have the alternates come out,
then the jury. I'll ask if they've
completed the form.
Judge Broderick: Ms. Rodriguez, if you
could have the alternate jurors to come
up. I'll tell them they can bring their
personal items up - any objection? Well,
I'll have them keep their belonging
downstairs. I'll tell the jurors they can
now speak, if they wish...
Update: Judge Broderick has sent the
jurors back to each sign the verdict
sheet. The remaining alternate jurors are
still in the courtroom. The defense
lawyers are passing notes among
themselves, with Saipov looking on.
Judge Broderick: The jurors have sent
another note, that the verdict form as
been completed. Judge: Please hand the
verdict form to Ms. Rodriguez, please.
[Judge Broderick, wearing white COVID
mask, flips through the jury form.] Judge:
I'm going to read the form
Judge Broderick: So you unanimously find
Sayfullo Saipov was 18 years old? Yes is
checked. Now Section II. Counts 1-8 and
count 28 - we unanimously find that this
factor has been proved beyond a reasonable
doubt. 2, the same - unanimous finding of
yes.
Judge Broderick: 3, you have checked yes,
we unanimously find the factor has been
proved beyond a reasonable doubt. 4, you
have checked We unanimously find it has
been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Part B: any non unanimous? None, is
written.
Judge Broderick: Now, statutory
aggravating factors. Part A1, the deaths
of Diego Enrique Angelini, Nicholas
Cleves, Ann-Laure Decadt, Darren Drake,
Ariel Erlij, Hernan Ferruchi, Hernan Diego
Mendoza & Alejandro Damian Pagnucco -
unanimously, it has been proved
Judge: Again, Part B, any
non-unanimous? None is written. Twice.
Now, non-statutory aggravating factors.
4(1), you have unanimously found. And
4(2), on Count 28, you have unanimously
found. 4(3), the defendant did this to
further ISIS - you have unanimously found
Judge: 4(4), future violence - you have
marked, We do NOT unanimously find this
has been proved as to any of the capital
counts. [Not]
Judge Broderick: 4(5), you have
unanimously found the intent to instill
fear. And 4(6), lack of remorse, you have
unanimously found. Now the mitigating
factors. Factor 1, would be
incarcerated for life. 12 so find, as on H
Unit at ADX Florence: 12
Judge Broderick: Also 12 each on
mitigating factors 3 through 26.
Mitigating factor 27, are there some who
believe life imprisonment is appropriate?
Number of jurors: seven. [Seven]
Judge Broderick: On the rest of item
27, there are not factors filled out. Now
Section 6, Determination of Sentence.
Count One - "There is nothing checked
off." [Nothing checked off - continues for
all other counts]
Judge Broderick: Juror Number 1, does the
special verdict form indicate your
decision in this case? Yes, your Honor. So
say Jurors 2-12. Judge Broderick:
The case is now concluded. You are free to
discuss the case if you so choose.
Judge Broderick: Jurors, consider whether
to discuss what happened in the jury room.
You are now excused. I will come back and
thank each of you.
The
case is US v.
Saipov,
17-cr-722
(Broderick)
Watch
this site
Saipov, courtesy to Inner City
Press by Elizabeth Williams
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2023 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|
,
