Recent Article Published

                                                           Ohio Jury Selection Process

 On December 28, 2017, I filed a Writ of Certiorari (brief) in the United States Supreme Court under Case No.  17-7318.  I am asking the Supreme Court Justices to clarify and reform the jury selection process and recommend solutions for the Justices to consider.  The courts have been allowed to operate in violation of our Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guaranteed right to an “impartial jury”. Congress has also enacted the Jury Selection Services Act (JSSA) requirement, that litigants have federal juries from a cross section of the community litigants live in. Currently, in Ohio, jury pools are selected from registered voters and government-approved photo identification (BMV records).  I wrote an article about the Ohio Jury Selection Process, which appeared in a 2018 issue of the Cincinnati Herald.

However, this method has proved to be ineffective in achieving a pool from a cross section of the community litigants live in. Many people do not have government-approved photo identification and registered voters can be purged from the voting list. I have recommended that the United States Supreme Court consider using the following method to select jury pools: When there are sensitive issues and/or concerns regarding implicit bias, require questionnaires be submitted to the pool when the court sends out the notice for jury duty.  Counselors are to have access to the questionnaires prior to the pool being seated. Counselors talk with each other regarding which persons do not need to be a part of the pool.  The remaining persons are seated in the pool and parties proceed with general questioning.  Upon completion of general questioning of the pool, counselors select three perspective jurors each, not necessarily seated in the order of 1-6 and continue questioning with seated jurors. Parties are permitted to use their challenges and continue this procedure until six jurors and an alternate is seated. Initially, this process may take some additional time, but will accomplish the goal of an impartial jury.

All of us have implicit bias. Implicit bias is when we have a bias for or against a person or issue and are not aware of it. Psychologist have developed a test to identify what degree a person harbors implicit bias toward an issue or person; male, female, transgender, police officers, persons of color and the list goes on.  The allowance of jury questionnaires should be permitted in all cases where these factors are present.

Help civil rights plaintiffs and their attorneys achieve justice for all by writing the United States Supreme Court Justices at: United States Supreme Court, 1 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20543.  Simply state, “Please reform the jury selection process because we have a guaranteed right to an “impartial jury”.  See Supreme Court Case No. 17-7318”.

Hamilton County Juvenile Detention Center

I wrote an article, House of Horrors, which appeared in the November 30, 2018 issue of the Cincinnati Herald.  The article talks about cruel and unusual punishment of two of my clients occurring at the Juvenile Detention Center (2020) on 2020 Auburn Ave.  Hamilton County Juvenile Court is the entity that gives custody to 2020 and the administrative Judge of Juvenile Court appoints the superintendent of 2020.  I also wrote of some solutions to the problems at 2020; the start of which is new leadership of Juvenile Court. I am working on two other articles regarding Juvenile Court.  Look for them in December 2018 and upcoming months.

Hamilton County Juvenile Court/Hamilton County Jobs and Family Services/Family Access to Integrated Recovery

I wrote an article, The Farce, which appeared in the February 23, 2019 issue of the Cincinnati Herald.  A farce is an empty or patently ridiculous act.  The article addresses how intertwined the Hamilton County Juvenile Court (HCJC) is with Hamilton County Children Services(HCJFS) and how intertwined Hamilton County Children Services is with Family Access to Integrated Recovery (FAIR). Both of which are a conflict.  We have a Fourteenth Amendment right to family preservation.  HCJFS is “like a box of chocolates, you never know what you are going to get”.  HCJFS does not have the resources (wisdom, time and money) to determine or take custody of a child.  HCJC is pretty consistent in that they will most likely order whatever HCJFS presents to HCJC.