RANCOR IN THE JURY ROOM

Some Panel Members Say They Were Not Listened To

OAKLAND -- A faction of jurors in the "Riders" case said Wednesday
they believe the three former Oakland police officers were guilty of
abusing their power three years ago, but that their opinions were
marginalized by the jury foreman and others.

And the jury's failure to unanimously agree on 27 of the 35 charges
against Clarence "Chuck" Mabanag, Jude Siapno and Matthew Hornung was
a reflection of deliberations that took on the aspects of "a
dysfunctional family," they said in interviews.

"There were people who were firmly convinced of guilt, and others who
resisted that notion," one juror said. "We just worked as hard as we
could to promote the way we saw this from the evidence, too hard to be
dismissed as people who couldn't come to a decision."

The juror said one faction sided with the West Oakland residents who
testified about being framed or beaten by the former officers in the
summer of 2000.

Two of the jurors said efforts to argue guilt were summarily rebuffed
by the foreman and two of his allies, jointly nicknamed "the three
musketeers." One member of that trio was tagged "Cowboy," and said his
work in West Oakland had taught him about "those people," another
juror said Wednesday.

"Three people decided for their own agendas they were not going to
convict these guys," said one juror, who thought the fired cops did
some of what prosecutor David Hollister charged. "They would laugh and
make fun of us, saying we weren't going to change their minds.

"We were really upset, and we couldn't do nothing," the juror added.
"We told the judge, and he didn't want to know what was going on in
the jury room."

Contents of jury notes were debated by prosecution and defense
attorneys before Alameda County Superior Court Judge Leo Dorado
crafted replies to the questions. Law precluded Dorado from tampering
with jury deliberations.

Another juror said an array of questions sent to Dorado during the 56
days of deliberation were designed to elicit responses that would show
the jury foreman -- a night law student -- was mistaken in his
interpretation of the law or evidence.

The foreman, the youngest member of the jury, declared the case
against the Riders bogus within the first 15 minutes of deliberations
and didn't budge, other jurors said. The foreman was quoted in a
newspaper report Wednesday as saying the problem with the Riders case
was that both of the prosecution's key witnesses -- former Oakland
police rookie Keith Batt -- and the sergeant who headed the internal
affairs investigation came across as liars.

Jurors said in interviews Wednesday the foreman stated early in
deliberations he was convinced Hornung, Siapno and Mabanag were being
made scapegoats for political ends and that charges in the case should
never have been filed.

"(The foreman) really worked, playing the role of defense lawyer, as
if he were practicing," a juror said of the law student. "I didn't
understand why he was so close-minded. When we presented evidence, he
came up with an out of context, no logic, response."

An effort to vote the foreman out was unsuccessful.

By the final days of deliberations, the foreman reportedly responded
to debate attempts by reading a newspaper and ignoring the person
arguing the opposing position, according to the jurors. A woman in the
foreman's camp would carefully tend to her make-up. The Cowboy
reportedly piped up at one point that the cops in Oakland did what
they had to do to fight crime.

"You put up with this crap for four months, then try to beat it down
and defeat it," a juror said of his frustration in trying to debate
the Riders' purported innocence. "There was stuff that was
overwhelming, proven over and over to our satisfaction."

The juror cited 13 charges in which the final votes showed six or more
panelists in favor of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Some jurors won
over by the evidence presented by Hollister said they were heartened
to see there were "a lot of really good cops in Oakland" and praised
those officers who took stands for police ethics and honesty.

Some jurors voiced admiration for Batt and Oakland police Officer
Steve Hewison, who were called to testify they saw the Riders employ
illegal tactics, such as pouncing on suspected drug dealers without
proper cause and writing false reports to justify arrests.

"Here was the classic smear of the whistle-blower," one juror said,
rejecting the defense's argument that Batt and Hewison conspired to
ruin the careers of veteran cops. "I would like to reach out to
Hewison. You could see the mask of agony and tension on his face when
he testified."

Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff is mulling whether to
retry Mabanag, Hornung and Siapno on any or all of the 27 charges that
the Riders jury deadlocked on this week. The jury acquitted the
accused men on eight charges. Dorado declared mistrials on the
remaining counts.

Shortening the proceedings and streamlining the charges would improve
the odds of jurors being able to agree on verdicts, according to some
members of the panel dismissed this week. Shortening the trial would
also make it possible to get more young and ethnically diverse
candidates in the jury pool, because those with less financial
security would be more able to afford the time off to serve.

The prospect of spending months on a jury was a key factor in culling
prospective jurors from the original pool of nearly 700 people called
during the selection process for the Riders trial, which opened Sept.
12, 2002. That jury began deliberations May 29 of this year.

The Riders jury was comprised of seven men and five women. The jurors
were two Latinas, an Asian woman, a Hawaiian man and eight white men
and women. Two African-American women served as alternate jurors,
attending the trial but not taking part in deliberations. One of those
women was visibly chagrined when court clerk Rhoda Nishiyama read the
"not guilty" verdicts in court Tuesday. The alternate juror was
adamant in her belief that having blacks on the jury would have
changed the outcome.

"If the D.A. can't convict these guys with that jury, they will never
convict them,' said Mabanag's attorney, Mike Rains, who maintained the
panel was weighted in favor of the prosecution at the outset. "The
fact you had three guys who were smart, a little conservative, and saw
through all the crap thrown up by the prosecution is wonderful."

Rains contended the case was one of evidence and not race. Rains noted
that the Constitution guarantees defendants, not witnesses, to juries
of their peers. Mabanag, 38, and Siapno, 35, are Filipino. Hornung,
31, is white. Purported Riders leader Frank Vazquez is believed to
have fled to his native Mexico.

"The race card was never an issue and only became an issue since
someone didn't get the result they wanted," Rains said. "We were
looking for jurors who cared about law and order, cared about police
officers, and were conservative minded. Half the jury didn't fit that
bill at all. We settled for that jury."

Rains conceded that the defense team excused several blacks from the
jury without stating reasons, but pointed out the prosecution
exercised the same right to excuse two candidates who shared his
client's Filipino heritage.

"The prosecution will not be able to put 12 congenital idiots up
there, they are going to get at least one or two cowboys," Rains said
of the prospect of a new trial.

"If this case had been tried anywhere outside Alameda County, I think
these guys would have walked."

Rains lauded Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff's ability and
judgment, saying Orloff is a conscientious prosecutor misled by the
unreliable results of an internal affairs probe done by Sgt. Jon
Madarang. Hollister and Orloff remain steadfast in their confidence in
Madarang's findings.

Meanwhile, federal officials are considering the possibility of
pursuing a civil rights violation case against The Riders.