New perspective DUI case
I've now been a juror in two drunk driving trials, many years apart. One while I was drinking, one after I'd quit. I had a completely different perspective this time and it was a sobering experience. When I was a drinker I could easily see "reasonable doubt" everywhere. Granted, in the first case there truly was reasonable doubt, but l think I could relate to the accused so I was probably more lenient in how I looked at the evidence.
In this recent trial, only two of us felt the woman was guilty. She had failed on some sobriety tests, officers smelled alcohol, she admitted to drinking after saying she didn't, was 3 hours off when asked the time, couldn't produce her license, and couldn't explain what happened to her car (2 shredded tires,etc.) I think they didn't have enough concrete evidence so the other jurors weren't convinced. The woman was young, and had a young child. While the others on the jury were worried about a guilty verdict wrecking her life, I was thinking more along the lines of "a not guilty verdict" will be worse, she'll feel like she doesn't have a problem and won't get help or quit, and next time could be a disaster.
How do you think you would have reacted? Do you think quitting makes you look at these situations differently?