Skip to main content

e-Edition FAQs

Do you have e-Edition Questions? Click Here to find your answers.


First Jurors Selected For Murder Trial

January 28, 2010 by Josh Morgan

Over six days, more than 100 prospective jurors came and went through New Haven Superior Court for the triple murder trial of Steven Hayes.
As of Wednesday, three people had been selected.
A writer from New Haven, who was out of the country at the time of the July 2007 Petit family murders, was chosen on Jan. 20, the second day of jury selection.
On Monday afternoon, a middle aged East Haven women was selected as the second juror. On Tuesday, a female analyst with the Department of Environmental Protection was chosen to sit on the jury. The names of the jurors will not be published in The Cheshire Herald due to the high profile nature of the case.
For the trial, 12 jurors, six alternates, and two backups will be selected. Court officials believe the selection of 20 jurors could take up to six months. Hayes' trial won't begin until Sept. 13, at the earliest.
During jury selection, the prosecution and defense can dismiss a potential juror, without cause, using a peremptory challenge. Each side received 36 challenges at the start of the process. Through Jan. 26, the defense has used six challenges, while the prosecution has used two.
Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky are being held for the murder of Jennifer Hawke-Petit, and her two children, Hayley, 17, and Michaela, 11. Dr. William Petit was beaten but survived the July 23, 2007 home invasion. Both men were arrested after allegedly fleeing the Petits’ Sorghum Mill Drive home and face the death penalty, if found guilty of capital felony murder.
Hayes will be tried later this year, with Komisarjevsky going to trial sometime in 2011.
Officials refused to comment on the jury selection process, citing a gag order that was imposed in 2007.


Jury Selection Discriminates

February 10, 2010 by burban (not verified), 7 years 6 weeks ago
Comment: 115

There's no doubt that this jury pool is selecting only those who have no problem with the death penalty, because that's what the prosecution wants at sentencing and is one reason for the delay. It's unanimous that these two criminals are guilty in degrees, to the charges. The death penalty is not justice, but a barbaric primitive reaction filled with hatred and evil intent. Those who want justice = punishment, will be causing pain and suffering upon the innocent family members & loved ones, of at least one of these two criminals.
To kill is illegal and legal killing is just as savage and uncivilized. Execution will not bring a conclusion to the suffering & pain to anyone but the criminal. The criminally insane don't seem to have consciences' and the death penalty hasn't proven effective as a deterrant. The true populous consists of people who believe as me. So, to select only those who have no problem "no conscience" with executioning the mentally ill or criminally insane is like selecting a jury of Christians to decide if Christmas should be dropped as a federal holiday. It's discrimination and segregation, which is unconstitutional.
Speculation, that both are equally guilty without a fair trial has filled the news media. With so many out of work or collecting unemployment, one would think that there wouldn't be a shortage of potential jurors. Has anyone noticed the description of a "Petit Jury"? Meaning an ordinary jury for the trial of a civil or criminal action. Well, there's nothing ordinary about this trial's jury selection.

Premium Drupal Themes by Adaptivethemes