Essay About Jury Of A Man Accused Of Murder And Monte Milcray

Dear God, This Is Dean
Join now to read essay Dear God, This Is Dean
Dear God, This is Dean
Few things in life seem more daunting than serving on the jury of a man accused of murder. In the course of jury deliberations, many things can get in the way of the jury arriving at an ultimate decision. In the case of the State of New York vs. Monte Milcray, Milcray was accused of stabbing Randolph Cuffee to death. Milcray claimed that he was defending himself from Cuffee’s unwelcome sexual advances. The jurors in this case had several obstacles to overcome before they could reach a unanimous verdict. For one, many had judgments that were driven by a desire for justice rather than a desire to follow law. Some also struggled with knowing what their responsibility was and needed clear direction. Another factor which stalled their deliberations was that there were a few jurors who were not in line with the majority. One of the jurors, Dean Kossler gave an impassioned speech regarding law and justice. He said that “I’ve been asked to apply the law. Justice belongs to God; men only have the law” (Burnett 138). This powerful moment for the jury helped them realize the difference between law and justice and was the most pivotal in moving them to a verdict.

Twelve men and women were selected to serve on the jury in the case where the defendant, Monte Milcray was accused of stabbing Randolph Cuffee to death — a man whom he claimed he thought was a woman at the time of their encounter. Milcray claimed that he stabbed Cuffee in self-defense because Cuffee tried to sodomize him. After all the evidence had been presented, the jury deliberated for several agonizing days before they reached a verdict of not guilty. During these deliberations, however, the jurors were quite divided. Some like Leah Tennet and Pat Malley believed Milcray to be not guilty of murder, while others like Paige Bare and Suzy O’Mear were adamant that he killed Cuffee in cold-blood and needed to pay for it. The jury foreman, D. Graham Bennett, struggled with knowing which way to vote and hoped for a hung jury. One of the jurors, Dean Kossler, helped bring them all together to focus on the job at hand when he made a short, yet passionate speech regarding the law and justice. He told them that “Justice belongs to God; men only have the law. Justice is perfect, but the law can only be careful” (138). This enlightening speech helped the jurors tremendously and enabled them to move toward a verdict.

With this understanding, the jurors removed judgments driven solely by a desire for justice from their deliberations. While they deliberated, their main focus revolved around whether or not they should adhere to the law, and their instructions, or allow their individual ideas of justice to prevail. One juror in particular, Paige, was very vocal concerning this. She expressed that they were “constrained by the ‘letter’ of the law while ignoring its ‘spirit’ — a spirit…that amounted to the righteous desire not to let people who do bad things go unpunished” (Burnett 118). She felt that Milcray did a terrible thing, and that although she was convinced that the prosecution had not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Milcray hadn’t acted in self-defense, she felt Milcray still needed to be punished for the things he did do–lie and leave a wounded man to die. Because of this mindset, she, and others were willing to compromise and agree on a lesser charge of manslaughter instead of murder. When deliberations reached a climax after Pat and Adelle got into a verbal altercation, Dean stood up and said that “Milcray did something very, very wrong…But…nobody asked me to play God. I’ve been asked to apply the law. Justice belongs to God; men only have the law. Justice is perfect, but the law can only be careful” (138). These fitly spoken words, from a man with a quiet yet authoritative

manner, corralled them all together and helped them refocus. It was after this that Paige herself “abandoned the idea of a compromise on manslaughter–called for a poll” (142). She set aside her own desire for justice and whether or not Milcray should be punished for his part in Cuffee‘s death. She and others were then able to focus on the job of allowing the law to help them determine Milcray’s guilt or innocence. This important moment enabled the jury see the difference between law and justice, and moved them toward a verdict.

It helped them understand their responsibility. Before Dean’s speech, they all struggled with knowing what their responsibility was and what was relevant. Adelle went right to the heart of the matter by saying,

“What I keep wanting here is for us to figure out some way to do justice, but I am starting to realize that the law itself may be a different thing. What is my real responsibility? The Law? Or the just thing? I’m not sure what the