Moussaoui Jury Seeks Definition
The judge in Zacarias Moussaoui's death penalty trial admonished jurors Friday to avoid looking up words in the dictionary after learning that one went on the Internet to see what "aggravating" means.
How aggravating and mitigating factors balance out in the jurors' minds is key to their deliberations, which resumed after a daylong break called because one juror was sick.
Moussaoui can only be executed for his part in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks if the jury believes unanimously that his crimes involved at least one of three main aggravating factors alleged by the government. If so, the jury must consider mitigating factors offered by the defense before reaching that decision.
The jury of nine men and three women is deciding whether Moussaoui should be executed or given life in prison.
Deliberations halted briefly Friday after the court learned that a juror had looked up "aggravating" online. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema decided in a closed hearing that the juror's misstep wasn't significant enough to stall deliberations further, but told the jury not to look up words again.
She said the word "essentially means to make something worse" and pointed to jury instructions that define aggravating factors as "factors or circumstances that tend to support the death penalty."
Moussaoui, after the hearing and out of the jury's presence, declared loudly, "Moussaoui aggravating curse on America."
Earlier in the week, Brinkema denied the jury's request for a dictionary, saying that to supply them would be like placing extraneous evidence in jury room.
The panel resumed its work Friday morning after taking Thursday off because a juror was sick. The jury had already deliberated 16 hours over three days.
Zacarias Moussaoui's reaction to the news the jury had been sent home because of a sick juror was, "Moussaoui biological warfare." The comment came as the al Qaeda conspirator was led out of the courtroom outside Washington Thursday.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema expressed concern that the jury's deliberations would be put on hold for days due to the male juror's illness. CBS Radio News correspondent Barry Bagnato reports that the jury panel can only meet as a complete group.
In court, Brinkema said the juror needed medication, but was skeptical.
"I want a juror to be 100 percent. I don't want a 90-percent juror ... this is a very stressful situation," Brinkema said.
Although the verdict will come down to one central question — whether Moussaoui lives or dies — the jury is having to consider dozens of questions on a 42-page verdict form — each a piece of the puzzle about who this man is, what he did and what penalty he deserves.
In this case, prosecutors alleged three main aggravating factors for each of the three counts against Moussaoui.
At least one must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. They were that he committed his crimes in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved manner; that he committed his crimes knowing others besides the intended victims might die; and that he used substantial planning or premeditation.
Then they added seven more aggravating factors, such as a lack of remorse, for the jury to consider separately. These extra factors, known as non-statutory, are optional elements meant to add weight to the federal case.
For any such condition to stick, the jury must accept it unanimously. If none of the three main aggravating factors is proved, the case is over and Moussaoui goes to prison for life. But if any of the conditions are accepted by the jury, then 23 mitigating circumstances raised by the defense must be weighed, one by one.
Check out Moussaoui court documents and transcripts.
Among them: Do jurors agree Moussaoui will not be a substantial risk to guards if imprisoned for life? Do they agree he was an ineffectual al Qaeda operative? Do they think he really believes he will achieve the afterlife rewards of a martyr if he is executed?
Altogether there are 33 such questions, to be weighed up to three times for each separate count.
Unlike the prosecution, the defense does not have to prove its factors beyond a reasonable doubt or achieve unanimity on the jury. If any of the jurors thinks a mitigating factor is more likely true than not true, it becomes a factor for the jury to consider.
There is no formula for assigning weight to various factors, even if jurors do decide they exist. Jurors can decide one aggravating factor outweighs all mitigating factors, or the other way around.
In the end, it still comes down to life or death and what the jurors think. The questions tell them some of what they have to think about.