THE SINCLAIR CASE
Chapter Twelve: What Would Roby Bearden Have Said
Ralph Roy could barely conceal the satisfaction he felt over the way things were going before Judge LeBlanc.
The jury selection went smoothly until prospective juror Roby Bearden was examined by the prosecutor.
“Mr. Bearden,” Roy routinely asked, “do you have conscientious scruples against the infliction of the death penalty?”
The same question had been asked of each prospective juror before Bearden.
Bearden was a young chemist—intelligent, thoughtful and quite deliberate.
“I do not have any opposition to that penalty,” he responded. “However, in this case I do have a reservation against it. It is, I suppose, an opinion formed from the preceding hour of this trial.”
English was startled, although he did quickly respond.
“I didn’t get the last words,” he said, “the preceding what?”
“The previous testimony,” he quickly said, “from sitting here in court for the past two days. It is hard for me to believe that asking for the death penalty in this case would not be exactly fair, I will put it that way.”
Roy realized a potential problem.
“Well, where are you employed?” he asked.
“I am a chemist for Esso Research,” Bearden replied.
“Are you a native Baton Rougean?” Roy asked.
That question was important. Only a Baton Rouge native - one with an appreciation for the historical importance of Istrouma football - could appreciate the magnitude of J.C. Bodden’s death.
“No, I am from Little Rock, Arkansas,” Bearden answered, automatically dooming any chance he had to be a juror.
English tried to salvage the moment.
“I submit that he would be a fair juror,” he quickly informed the court. “Now he didn’t say he couldn’t return ---“
“Judge,” Roy complained, “I wish he would quit interrupting me.”
“I am talking to the court,” English responded sharply. “I am not talking to you.”
Roy was an arrogant man, consumed with his own sense of self-importance. Sarcasm came natural to him. He was a tall man with a thick crop of grey, crew-cut hair, a hawk-like nose and ruddy, almost pocked-marked face that perfectly suited his harsh prosecutorial demeanor.
“Well, I wish he would quit talking to the court while I am interrogating the jurors,” the prosecutor shot back.
“You can interpose an objection whenever you think it is necessary, Mr. English,” LeBlanc mediated, “but I wouldn’t interrupt his interrogation unless you are going to make an objection.”
“That’s correct,” Bearden responded, looking Roy directly in the eye.
The prosecutor had heard enough.
“I will submit him for cause,” he informed the court, moving back to the prosecutor’s table to sit down.
LeBlanc didn’t need any encouragement. He recognized the problem as well. Bearden had to go. He was a potential obstacle to the death penalty.
“Well that being true,” the judge pronounced, “as I just read the law, a prospective juror has to state without reservation that he is impartial in the matter, and if you feel that you are not impartial it is the proper thing for the judge to excuse you, which I now do. You are excused finally, and thank you, sir.”
LeBlanc and Roy would have liked for the matter to end there, but English was not about to oblige them.
“I want to object, Your Honor,” he said, “to excusing him for cause, because I never understood the venireman to say that he couldn’t return a verdict carrying the death penalty.”
There were rare, precious moments when English completely disrupted and frustrated Roy’s presentation of the case. The Bearden episode was one of those moments.
“He did state, Mr. English,” LeBlanc said, “that he was impartial [sic] in this case, that he had formed an opinion from what he had gathered in the last several days, and he didn’t feel that he could bring in a verdict carrying the death penalty in this particular case. As a general proposition he was not opposed to capital punishment.”
LeBlanc paused, before directing his attention to Bearden.
“Isn’t that about what you said?”
“That is correct,” Bearden replied.
“And for that reason I have to excuse him,” LeBlanc continued, ”because the State has a right in all capital cases to have jurors committed in advance to rendering a death penalty verdict. This gentleman said that he could not do that in this case, and that’s why I am excusing him.”
“Well I evidently misunderstood him,” English conceded.
“Well, he has verified what I have just said,” LeBlanc stressed. “I just checked with him. He said he didn’t think it would be right.”
English continued to press.
“Now he might hear the evidence and decide it would be right. That is the test.”
“Well, as I recall his testimony,” LeBlanc explained, “he said as a general proposition he was not opposed to capital punishment, but in this particular case he did not think it was right, which, of course, would mean that he was expressing an opinion that, as a juror, he could not do it in this case.”
Turning to Bearden, the judge asked: “Now isn’t that correct?”
“That is correct, Your Honor,” the young chemist replied. “I will be happy to explain my stand if necessary.”
Ralph Roy bolted out of his chair as though propelled by nuclear energy.
“Judge,” he said adamantly, “I don’t think he should be called upon to explain his stand. He has admitted to impartiality, and Your Honor has just read the law that says the reason for impartiality is immaterial. You just excused the juror for impartiality. I don’t think it’s fair to go into the reason.”
“I don’t think it’s necessary either,” LeBlanc agreed.
“It appears to me that he looked at the defendant and had sympathy for him, or something,” English interjected. “He said in this case –“
“That is not correct,” Bearden interrupted.
It was evident that Bearden did not want to be identified with the defense. While he had formed an opinion against the death penalty, he wanted everyone to understand his opinion was not based on sympathy for me.
“Well, Your Honor, I would like to have an explanation, just in fairness,” English said.
Judge LeBlanc was not about to let a detailed explanation by Bearden into the record.
“You may state your position again,” he said. “You have stated you are partial in this case, and you stated that as a general proposition you have no aversion to capital punishment but in this case you don’t think it would be a proper sentence. Now is that correct?”
“That is correct,” Bearden replied.
“Now I don’t think he should be allowed to go into the reason why he has formed that opinion,” LeBlanc added.
The judge hesitated. He turned to Bearden and asked:
“As you feel now, even if you were accepted as a juror and you were convinced of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, you could not render a verdict of guilty as charged that you know would carry the death penalty?”
“That is correct,” Bearden said.
“The court excuses you.”
“Well, I will withdraw my objection,” English said.
It took several more hours to seat an all-male, all-white jury willing to return a death penalty verdict. A total of 49 prospective jurors had been examined. Eight of the twelve jurors chosen from the jury pool stated they had read, heard about, or discussed the case with others; one worked for the Ethyl Corporation where J.C. Bodden’s father worked; one was a personal friend of District Attorney Sargent Pitcher; one was a personal friend with the warden of the parish jail; three regularly shopped at the store where Bodden was killed; one lived only eight blocks from the store; and two lived in the same neighborhood where Bodden lived.
A jury primed to convict.