After a full afternoon of deliberation (I guess juries in such cases don't get
as much time as felony juries) the panel was deadlocked 6 to 6 and she walked.
One of my fellow jurors remarked that field sobriety tests are "tricked up to
make people look drunk" and should be disregarded. When I reminded him of the
trooper's other testimony, he said the trooper was probably lying because he
would "get in trouble" if the woman wasn't convicted. Five other jurors found
this argument convincing.


And when she does it again and kills a carload of innocent folks, can we
also try the holdout jurors? I guess driving off the road and running
into a stationary tree was not considered as evidence by these nit wits.

They should video tape these tests and let the jury decide. That way the
officer's prejudice would be removed to a great extent (I suppose you
could place the camera on an unedited video in a way to affect the
outcome - maybe). Then again, if running into a tree does not convince
you, a video of someone falling down drunk may not either.

Be careful out there,
Mike