My Favorite INANIMATE Object

I would have to say the pen is my favorite inanimate object because from that pen I can become anyone I want and be anywhere I want to be. With the pen I can be the richest person earth, or make myself pauper. I can have millions of fans or be a hermit. The pen will either make me larger than life or be the death of me.

Judy Blume - One Size Fits All

Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret by Judy Blume




I don't care what age you are - as long as you are past junior high age, any of Judy Blumes books are for you. I'm in my 40's and I still read her books because at some point in my life I was a girl in junior high trying to make it through thinking those were the tough times. Little did I know that those were the best and simplest times of our lives. How I wish I could go back sometimes.



View all my reviews

The Kitchen House, part II

The Kitchen House by Kathleen Grissom

My rating: 5 of 5 stars


The first book that affected me was Catcher in the Rye, the second was The Help and now The Kitchen House.

Set during slavery, it centers around a 6 year old indentured servent who is brought to a plantation and takes up residence with the slaves who work at the big house. The book follows the girl, the slaves and the plantation owners and their family and friends for almost 20 years.

Its story is told between Levinia (indentured servent) and Belle (a house slave). Things that take place are seen through both their eyes from different views.

You will grow to love all the characters, even the Cap't (the plantation owner).

If you loved The Help, you will definitely love this book and not want to put it down. Once you have completed the book, you will want to read it again.

I had the pleasure of interviewing the author and from that we are developing a friendship. She's a wonderful person and fascinating one at that.



View all my reviews

The Jury Room - Facts Over Feelings

I don't claim to be an expert in the matter of juryism (yeah, I made up a word), but I have to give my two cents to the recent events that took place regarding the verdict in the Casey Anthony case.  And, mind you, I am not trying to sway people at all.  This is just a bit of an insight and my opinion.

As mentioned in my previous blog (scroll down to read), I served as a juror. Although a minor case (meaning not high profiled), the job of a juror is still the same. We must look at the facts and ONLY the facts.

The Case:
The charges against the guy was Assault Against a Peace Officer with a Deadly Weapon.
It happened in Baypoint (aka Gunpoint) where a Peace Office
recognized the defendant and wanted to question him. The defendant
became hostile, ran from the cop and ended up in a field where the
office drew his gun on the defendant while the defendant was holding a
large rock in his hand. The defendant then flung the rock at the cop
hitting the cop in the arm (where the gun was).

The Court - Day One:
We listened to the Defense's opening statement

The Prosecutor's opening statement

Then we heard from the Officer who was assaulted and witnesses.

Day Two:
More testimonies and then closing arguments. Once all that was done the judge, just as the judge did in the Anthony case, gave us our instructions along with the packets needed for us to do our work.

Jury Room:
The packet basically breaks down each item.
Assault
Peace Officer
Deadly
Weapon

From the list and its definition we had to determine if he did assault the Peace Officer. After we made our determination we moved to Peace Officer and those definitions. Made our decisions there. Next was deadly weapon (referring to the rock - a big one at that) that the Peace Office was hit with. We first had to determine if the rock was a deadly weapon. 11 of us said no. One said yes. OK. Now, us 11 had to explain to the 1 juror that it WASN'T a deadly weapon because before it became such, it was a rock and ONLY a rock.

There were two questions we had to ask the judge (actually, I had to ask since I was Foreperson). I think one had to do with a penal code, but I forget what the other one was.

One of our decisions, should we have found Mr. Garcia guilty, is to determine which Penal Code was he guilty of.

We did find him guilty of Assault Against a Peace Officer With a Deadly Weapon, but it wasn't an easy decision to come to. We had to go by evidence - hardcore evidence.

Before going into the jury room I was convinced Mr. Garcia was as guilty as they come. But when I entered the jury room and looked at the break down of everything, I wasn't so sure. I don't think any of us was sure and it made for great discussions.

I highly recommend everyone watch the movie 12 Angry Men with Henry Fonda. I watched that movie after serving juror duty and I had much more appreciation for the job.  But watch it to get a sense of what a jury has to go through and the decisions they have to make.

We can all agree the sky is blue, but when its broken down into tiny pieces and we have to put those tiny pieces together, we all will not agree the sky is blue.

Regarding the Casey Anthony case:
Some sat and watched the trial since day one and hoped for a guilty verdict. Some caught the end of it, me, and hoped for a guilty verdict and felt she was guilty. I began thinking and feeling like the majority of the population and had no doubt she would be found guilty. But when I got the phone call from a friend of mine telling me they found her not guilty, I was shocked. I stayed shocked for about an hour, until I remembered the job of a juror and I have to say that they did their job.

They could have easily gone in there and found her guilty and called it Bob Hope. But they were in there for approximately10 hours. The paperwork they had to go through and the stuff they had to read and agree upon - I can't imagine.

Their decision was not made from the heart - it was made from the law. If it was from the heart they would have been in and right back out - but they were in there for 10 hours.

Having Casey go to prison won't bring Caylee back (cliche, I know). People think that Caylee didn't get justice, but she did. She has thousands and thousands of people she's never met, care about her and wishing they could have taken her into their home (me included) so she didn't have to be subject to what her mother did. Caylee has the hearts of a lot of people, which is more than Casey can say. Casey now has the strong dislike of thousands and thousands of people.

I could easily rant and rave about the decision and what a horrible person Casey is, but what good is it going to do. I will be mad about the verdict - for I am human - but I will respect the verdict - as a former juror.

Again, I am not trying to sway people's decision or showing in favor of Casey in any way.  Just trying to give others a better understanding of the jury process.

I look forward to comments and/or questions.

Jury Duty

Back in April 2007 I was on a jury for a case that involved a man being charged with Assault On a Peace Officer with a Deadly Object. I think I was the only one in the jury room (where you sit and wait to be picked) that wanted to serve on a jury. And if I got picked I wanted to be foreman. I was able to do both.

Those who haven't served think that coming up with a verdict is easy. And it's not.

I'm watching the judge give the jury their finally instructions in the Casey M. Anthony trial and what he's saying to the jury is what we were told in our trial. I am speaking of the break down of the charges. Then when you get to the jury room you're looking at the break down again, but now on paper. It can be overwhelming because of the details that are there.

Being foreman put more pressure on the person because you are now looked upon to run the show and to basically referee disputes that break out between jurors. I only had a minor one and it was civil. But I also had to explain things to the jurors. I also had to make sure all the paperwork was signed and dated correctly. It was also my responsibility to ask the judge questions via writing when we confused about something.

I am not sure how long we were back in the jury room, but it does seem like you're back there a long time because you have to convince all 12 people to agree with each other and the way the charges are broken down, people can agree that there was a weapon present, but may not agree that it was used intentionally. I remember one lady saw the object as deadly but that wasn't what the question asked. I don't remember the exact working of the document but it basically asked if the object was deadly. We all said no because it was an object. It only became deadly when it was used. But the lady said the object was deadly because IT WAS USED in the crime. That's where a lot of our time was spent and it made good arguments.

We ended up finding the guy guilty of assault on a peace officer with a deadly weapon. We weren't there for the sentencing. No big deal to me.

I would love to serve on a jury again and serve as foreman. I almost got on a five week case in which a father was accused of killing his son. But as it turned out they had the jury picked. We were basically an alternate jury to be picked.