The charges

Kenny Rogers was charged with attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder.

The ADA took pains to impress upon us that a person could be convicted based on only circumstantial evidence -- it is just as valid as direct evidence -- and also that a defendant has the absolute right not to testify on his own behalf. The defendant, he told us, got into a murderous rage because he felt he had been disrespected, and had arranged with an employee who was also a felon, to kill the person who had humiliated him. The ADA's intro to the whole matter was appropriately dramatic and black-and-white -- the defendant is a bad guy and we should find him guilty. The defense attorney's presentation was perfunctory and delivered in a monotone, the gist being that there were multiple misunderstandings and that we would see that his client was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Reasonable doubt was a big topic. We heard several times that "beyond a reasonable doubt" is not beyond a shadow of a doubt, or beyond a minor doubt, but doubt that a reasonable person would draw from hearing the facts. I both liked this angle and felt some anxiety about it. Remember, daily the judge reminded us that we were not allowed to discuss anything with other jurors until the deliberation phase, and that we were not to discuss the trial with ANYone -- spouses, friends, religious advisers, therapists -- so my self-doubt and basic insecurity went undiluted for two and a half weeks, long enough for the inner voices to get pretty loud.