Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
MISSOULA DIVISION
I. Introduction
Before the Court are two motions to change venue, one filed
nature. The government takes the position that the voir dire
juror bias, and that the Court should refrain from deciding the
t h e f e d e r a l c o u r t who c a n j u d g e t h e e v i d e n c e f a i r l y . W e do n o t
e x p e c t t o t r y t h e c a s e t o j u r o r s who a r e i g n o r a n t ; i n d e e d , a n
informed c i t i z e n r y i s e s s e n t i a l t o a l l a s p e c t s of governance
case-not o n l y from t h e p r o s p e c t i v e of t h e p r o s e c u t i o n , b u t
e q u a l l y i f n o t more i m p o r t a n t l y f r o m t h e p o i n t o f v i e w o f t h e
accused. P r o o f o f i l l e g a l c o n d u c t i s t h e s i n e q u a non t o f i n d i n g
t h e i n d i v i d u a l Defendants w i l l n o t b e d e c i d e d by p e r s o n a l l i k e s
o r d i s l i k e s , o p i n i o n s , p r e j u d i c e s , o r sympathy. Each o f t h e
D e f e n d a n t s , from t h e c o r p o r a t i o n t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l s , i s presumed
innocent. T h a t p r e s u m p t i o n means a c q u i t t a l u n l e s s a n d u n t i l t h e
c o n t r a r y i s p r o v e n beyond a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t . My t h i r t y y e a r s o f
e x p e r i e n c e i n Montana a s a l a w y e r , a n d a s a j u d g e , convince m e
t h a t we a r e u p t o t h e t a s k a n d t h a t t h e c i t i z e n s h e r e w i l l n o t
d e c i d e t h e c a s e b a s e d on news a c c o u n t s . They w i l l be f a i r a n d
t h e y w i l l r e q u i r e t h e g o v e r n m e n t t o meet t h e h e a v y b u r d e n imposed
'AS of the date of this Order there are 14,282 prospective jurors
in the Missoula Division. As is discussed in this Order,
disqualification of jurors from the Missoula Division of the court is
not warranted by any proof presented at the hearing.
on it by the Constitution and laws of these United state^.^
For the reasons that follow, I conclude that the Defendants
District of Montana.
this case has been extensive over the past six years, although
the bulk of the coverage occurred during the years 2000-01. Dr.
eighteen months.
4
The Bronson Affidavit is attached to Grace's Motion to Change
Venue as Exhibit V.
5
this case, according to Dr. Bronson, is one of good versus evil,
basis that Dr. Bronson concludes that the passage of time will do
District of Montana.
findings :
Dr. Denis also notes that the study showed that those who
have read or heard news coverage of the case were roughly twice
not been exposed to the coverage. From these figures Dr. Denis
i n h i s view, t h e v o i r d i r e p r o c e s s i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o r o o t o u t
b i a s among p o t e n t i a l j u r o r s . D r . Vinson h o l d s t h e o p i n i o n , a t
odds w i t h my e x p e r i e n c e , t h a t a j u r o r i s u n l i k e l y t o r e v e a l a
b i a s i n a p u b l i c s e t t i n g b e f o r e h i s f e l l o w c i t i z e n s and a f e d e r a l
a c c e p t a b l e r e s p o n s e a f f i r m i n g o n e ' s a b i l i t y t o be i m p a r t i a l . Dr.
Vinson a l s o r e p o r t s a n e c d o t a l i n c i d e n t s i n which t h o s e w i t h
s t r o n g views c o n c e a l e d b i a s i n o r d e r t o g e t on t h e j u r y i n a n
many t i m e s ) d u r i n g v o i r d i r e a r e n o t l i k e l y t o l e a d t o g e n u i n e
and d i r e c t r e s p o n s e s r e g a r d i n g j u r o r b i a s . Based on h i s o p i n i o n s
and D r . Denis' c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e l e v e l of b i a s i n t h e
6 ~ h Vinson
e A f f i d a v i t i s attached t o Grace's Motion t o Change
Venue a s Exhibit W .
111. Background and Factual Findings7
stages, four, five, six years ago"). The years 1999 to 2001
2006, five to six years after most of the coverage was published.
Libby after 2001, and since then, the media coverage has been
less than what was seen in 1999 through 2001. See Govt. Hrg. Ex.
7
The Court's findings of fact are not intended to be confined to
this recitation. Further factual findings are contained in the
Analysis section of this opinion.
9
The Daily Inter Lake (Kalispell, MT - circulation: 15,600; 67
Opening Brief.
he asserts many people who receive a newspaper "do not read every
day or they read only a portion of the newspaper, even just the
news stories appearing within the past ten months. See Ex. B to
stories collected.
Court's consideration.
examination.
7.
Testimony, Tr. at 8.
venue. Id.
17. At the December 1, 2005 hearing, this Court recognized
10.
nature. a.B
20. Dr. Bronson's content analysis consisted of
21. The articles examined by Dr. Bronson span the time from
Aff., ¶ 15.
Id.
24. Defense counsel specifically instructed Dr. Bronson not
the articles Dr. Bronson focused on for his analysis; nor was
30. Dr. Bronson did not read transcripts of any voir dire
87.
9
Peremptory challenges in this case are governed by Rule 24(b) &
(c)(4), Fed. R. Crim. P.
15
31. The defendants presented no evidence of media coverage
thought that the events in Libby received about the same or less
the broadcast implies that the company was aware of the dangers
posed by conditions in the Libby Mine, yet never told the miners
Grace did not own the vermiculite mine in Libby when Mr.
news broadcast.
KECI feature.
implemented.
Division. Denis Af f . , ¶ 9.
not believe that the individuals charged in the case are guilty
IV. Analysis
A. Legal Standard
the said crimes shall have been committed." U.S. Const. Art.
the State and district where the crime shall have been
Daniels v. Woodford, 428 F.3d 1181, 1210 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting
10
The Advisory Committee's notes to Rule 21 imply that a
defendant's right to a fair and impartial jury supercedes his right to
be tried in the state and district of the alleged offense:
A
' defendant need only demonstrate one of two different
demonstrates that the community where the trial was held was
the crime." Harris v. Pullev, 885 F.2d 1354, 1361 (9th Cir.
Croft, 124 F.3d 1109, 1115 (9th Cir. 1997) (citation omitted).
jury is impaneled.