Jury pool in Smart kidnapping trial narrowed to 32

Estimated read time: 4-5 minutes

This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.

SALT LAKE CITY — Of the 330 Utahns who filled out juror questionnaires, 32 have now been retained to possibly decide the fate of the man charged with kidnapping Elizabeth Smart.

On Thursday morning, attorneys will narrow that group down and select a final 12-member jury plus two alternates to hear the case against Brian David Mitchell. Defense attorneys will be allowed to eliminate 11 of the 32 and prosecutors will have the opportunity to dismiss seven.

Then opening arguments in the long-awaited trial will begin, likely late Thursday morning.

A day after a federal judge scolded attorneys for the slow pace of jury selection, the process noticeably picked up Wednesday morning.

Eight men and two women were retained Wednesday morning. Defense attorneys Wednesday asked to dismiss each of the prospective jurors, as they have done with all but one candidate since the jury selection began on Monday.

Defense attorney Parker Douglas said, "We did not find more than four who hadn't prejudged the case."

They've argued that because each of those questioned has heard about Smart, they should be disqualified to be jurors.

"I think we're all interested in a fair and impartial trial," said Parker. "That's what the Constitution requires."

Mitchell's stepdaughter, who has sat in on two days of jury selection, says pretrial publicity makes it impossible to get a fair and impartial jury in Utah.

"I'm in shock that our justice system works this way, that they would keep people that clearly state their bias that they believe he's guilty," said Rebecca Woodridge. "There's no evidence, there's been no trial. It's all hearsay."

Woodridge says there's only one person she likes.

"There's only one person that I agree that should be on the jury so far, and that's a man that moved here in 2007. He doesn't have an opinion because he doesn't know anything. You can't expect people to not have an opinion. They've never heard Brian's side of anything," she said.

Each prospective juror has indicated he or she has heard of Smart and all knew that Mitchell was with her when she was found.

But U.S. District Judge Dale Kimball restated what he's already said several times before, that under the law, a judge doesn't have to seat a jury that doesn't know anything at all about Smart or Mitchell.

"It's sufficient if a juror can lay aside impression or opinion (about a defendant or a case)," he said. The judge also told defense attorneys, "Every juror is going to know (Mitchell) is accused. That's why we're here."

The prospective jurors retained Wednesday include:

A man who lived in San Jose until two years ago. The prosecution called him a "perfect juror" because in their minds, having him on the jury would be the equivalent of having a change of venue for the trial — something the defense has argued is necessary. He had heard of Mitchell and Smart, but until being called for jury duty, he thought the case was over. "I hadn't heard anything about the case for so long, I thought he had already been found guilty."
A man who "works in religion" who said he is committed to his faith and the teachings of the Bible and Book of Mormon. He seemed to know more about the case than other potential jurors, but he also only called Mitchell a suspect because he said the media called him a suspect. "I hope the (court) finds out the truth about who abused her and who held her all those months," he said.

The former street preacher accused of kidnapping Smart at knifepoint from the bedroom of her Federal Heights home in 2002 was in the courtroom briefly Wednesday morning before Kimball ordered him to leave to a nearby annex to witness the proceedings because of his disruptive singing -- something that has become a routine procedure in each of Mitchell's court appearances.

What was interesting, however, was not the singing, but the time Mitchell wasn't singing.

Before the judge entered the courtroom, Mitchell was engaged in what appeared to be conversation with his defense attorney Robert Steele. He also appeared to engage in conversations with his attorneys Tuesday, which has been unusual in his previous court appearances. At one point Wednesday, Mitchell looked around the courtroom, then started singing again.

When the judge arrived, there was a point when he stopped singing briefly, then shortly picked it up again when the next round of prospective jurors were brought into the courtroom.

Witnesses for the prosecution include Elizabeth Smart, her mother Lois and sister Mary Katherine. Mitchell's estranged wife, Wanda Barzee, is a witness for the defense.

------

Story compiled with contributions from Pat Reavy and Sandra Yi.