Trial Briefs - Trial Briefs January 2019
Is The #MeToo Movement Impacting Jurors?
Helen Baddour And Lauren Newton 2019-01-04 00:52:49
What if I told you that a woman is drugged, beaten, and raped in her apartment at a premier, upscale, gated Charlotte apartment complex by a man who has key fob access but is not a tenant? The apartment complex knows the man has key fob access and is not a tenant, and does nothing about it. Prior to the assault, the apartment complex knows the man tried to enter another woman’s apartment and does nothing about it.
What if I told you the woman who is raped drank alcohol earlier in the night at a party sponsored by the apartment complex? The woman invites the man to her apartment. The woman remembers close to nothing besides waking up in her bed with blood everywhere and the man lying beside her. The man showers in her bathroom the next morning and steals more than $30,000 worth of her jewelry.
What if I told you the woman reports the larceny but does not initially report the rape? The woman waits a week before going to her OB-GYN. The woman lives in her apartment for another month and a half before moving.
In just one year, a movement has swept through this country and across the world, uniting women under one hashtag. This movement calls, provokes, and encourages women to come forward, some after many years, to stand up and say: “me too.”
According to Google’s Me Too Rising project,1 the movement has touched every corner of the earth, affecting workplaces, schools, bars, restaurants, family, the internet, the way businesses are run, the way Hollywood is run, even the way strangers address each other walking down the street.
In a recent focus group, we gauged participants’ attitudes about the facts of our sexual assault cases and how they perceived the parties.
Do they believe the victim? Do they blame the apartment complex? The man? Or do they blame the victim? And we asked ourselves:
"This movement calls, provokes, and encourages women to come forward, some after many years, to stand up and say: ‘me too.’ ”
Is The #Metoo Movement Affecting Jurors?
Maybe.
Maybe, for two reasons. First, it appears people feel obligated to say what they believe they’re supposed to say. Second, what people say might not be how they actually vote in a jury room.
We wanted to get the participants talking about “victim blaming.” We asked if a sexual assault victim voluntarily lets her attacker into her home, waits to call the police, or doesn’t move from the apartment for a month and a half, do they view her claim with less credibility? A man in his late-50s responded, “Why wouldn’t she call the police?” This comment was met with outrage from the female participants. Another middle-aged man asked, “Why wouldn’t she leave the apartment immediately?” One woman in the room replied, “That is her home. It’s not easy to just leave your home. What if this had happened in a house she owned? Would you expect her to immediately sell her house?” The man did not answer the woman’s questions.
We asked the man in his late-50s, “Do you blame the victim?” He responded with a resounding, “No,” making us think that despite his skepticism about her decision-making, he still believed her and would vote in her favor in the end. Except, when the time came, the man voted against compensating the victim. Perhaps in light of the #MeToo movement, the man did not feel as though he could outwardly blame the victim. So, what he said to the group did not reflect how he voted.
The group was united in wanting more information of the attacker’s criminal history, and whether or not he had been charged and convicted with the assault. We had to explain to the group the difference between a civil case and a criminal case. The group kept trying to blur the lines. But those lines are blurred for plaintiffs’ lawyers. The one thing they made clear and all agreed upon is that the case becomes stronger if and when the defendant is convicted.
Ultimately, the majority of our mock jury voted in favor of the victim. The compensation they would have awarded was across the board. One younger man, who asked a lot of questions about the facts and seemed unconvinced the entire time, awarded the victim $1.2 million. He did not comment on whether the #MeToo movement affected him, and he certainly did not act like it. Yet on paper, he was our client’s greatest advocate.
Women and younger men not only believed our client, but came to her defense when asked about her decision-making before and after the assault. The only participants who voted against compensating the victim were the two middle-aged men. Had this been a real jury, it would have resulted in either a hung jury or a defense verdict. All told, what the participants said to the group did not necessarily reflect how they voted.
What Does This Tell Us?
No question, the movement is stirring up the emotions, opinions, and views of many. Those who feel strongly about believing women and against victim blaming, now, more than ever, are compelled to speak up when the opportunity presents itself. The women in the focus group did not hold back in responding to the questions posed by their male counterparts. Perhaps a couple of years ago, they would have sat silently listening to the men asking questions, questions that the men will never be able to answer.
The problem is that we don’t yet know how this information translates to 12 people in a deliberation room. We may never know. A juror may answer a question in voir dire in a way he thinks he’s supposed to answer but vote the other way when all is said and done.
In the wake of the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, the midterms, and the next big news story, we are interested to see if and how the dynamics of the #MeToo Movement shift in our focus groups and juries. The movement is young and social change is hard. One thing is for certain — we will keep asking the questions.
References
1 https://metoorising.withgoogle.com/
Helen S. Baddour is an attorney at Charles G. Monnett III & Associates. She graduated from North Carolina Central University School of Law in 2014 where she served as editor-in-chief of the North Carolina Central Law Review, Volume 36. She graduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2010 with a degree in journalism and mass communication. Baddour is an active member of the North Carolina Advocates for Justice and currently serves on the Board of the Women’s Caucus and Auto Torts Executive Committee. She is also a member of the American Association for Justice. Outside of practicing law, she is an avid runner and enjoys writing her blog, Chasing Helen, about running, fitness and overall well-being.
Lauren O. Newton is an attorney at Charles G. Monnett III & Associates. She graduated from Elon University and worked as a political consultant prior to law school. Newton graduated from the University of North Carolina School of Law in 2009 and is licensed to practice law in both North and South Carolina. She is an active member of the North Carolina Advocates for Justice, in which she currently serves on the Board of Governors. She is the past chair of the NCAJ Women’s Caucus and serves as the North Carolina revitalization governor on the Board of Governors for the American Association for Justice. Newton is a proud wife and mother of two who enjoys spending her time reading, trying new foods, running and doing Crossfit.
©Innovative Publishing Ink. View All Articles.