2008 Woodie Awards
Video related to this article is available below.Issue date: 11/15/07 Section: News
Student Murder Trial | Juror: State should retry Malinovskaya
Most still believe Wharton student is guilty; deadlock result of 'personality issues,' juror says
Jessica Sidman
The jury's unprecedented 11-day deliberations in the murder trial of Irina Malinovskaya ended with the majority angry that they could not reach a unanimous guilty verdict, one juror said in an interview this week.
Juror Jacob Harrison, who voted to convict the Wharton undergraduate for bludgeoning to death her ex-lover's girlfriend, said most jurors expressed frustration with the outcome and believe Malinovskaya should be tried a fourth time.
The jury voted 10-to-2 in favor of conviction for first-degree murder and 8-to-4 for second-degree murder. Malinovskaya was convicted for tampering with physical evidence.
Harrison said the mistrial boiled down to "personality issues" within the jury.
The two jurors who voted not guilty wanted more direct evidence, he said. Harrison added that one focused on details that others found insignificant.
"People you wouldn't even think could get angry got angry," he said.
The 10 jurors in favor of conviction - who continue to meet and e-mail - believed the evidence overwhelmingly pointed to Malinovskaya's guilt.
The deadlock was the third hung jury in the case, but Harrison still said he wants Delaware-state prosecutors to retry Malinovskaya another time.
Lead prosecutor Paul Wallace would not comment on the possibility of a fourth trial and would also not say when the state would make a decision.
Though fourth trials are rare, legal experts say it remains a very real possibility considering the amount of resources the prosecution has already devoted to the case and the fact that this jury leaned more in their favor.
The first trial ended in a 11-to-1 vote for acquittal, whereas the second deadlocked at 6-to-6.
Harrison - who did not learn about the way past juries voted until after the trial - said he was surprised to see that they leaned closer to acquittal.
He said the jury's visit to the crime scene made a big impact on the decision of many jurors.
Juror Jacob Harrison, who voted to convict the Wharton undergraduate for bludgeoning to death her ex-lover's girlfriend, said most jurors expressed frustration with the outcome and believe Malinovskaya should be tried a fourth time.
The jury voted 10-to-2 in favor of conviction for first-degree murder and 8-to-4 for second-degree murder. Malinovskaya was convicted for tampering with physical evidence.
Harrison said the mistrial boiled down to "personality issues" within the jury.
The two jurors who voted not guilty wanted more direct evidence, he said. Harrison added that one focused on details that others found insignificant.
"People you wouldn't even think could get angry got angry," he said.
The 10 jurors in favor of conviction - who continue to meet and e-mail - believed the evidence overwhelmingly pointed to Malinovskaya's guilt.
The deadlock was the third hung jury in the case, but Harrison still said he wants Delaware-state prosecutors to retry Malinovskaya another time.
Lead prosecutor Paul Wallace would not comment on the possibility of a fourth trial and would also not say when the state would make a decision.
Though fourth trials are rare, legal experts say it remains a very real possibility considering the amount of resources the prosecution has already devoted to the case and the fact that this jury leaned more in their favor.
The first trial ended in a 11-to-1 vote for acquittal, whereas the second deadlocked at 6-to-6.
Harrison - who did not learn about the way past juries voted until after the trial - said he was surprised to see that they leaned closer to acquittal.
He said the jury's visit to the crime scene made a big impact on the decision of many jurors.
Viewing Comments 1 - 8 of 9
JGH
posted 11/15/07 @ 8:11 AM EST
So there should be a FOURTH trial for Malinovskaya? Because re-trying her would mean a fourth trial, right?
Isn't enough, enough? Or is there somehow an argument that Malinovskaya's lawyers have not proven reasonable doubt if three separate juries could not come to a decision?
Alum (lawyer)
posted 11/15/07 @ 9:12 AM EST
Pretty fascinating reporting DP- an excellent job. This was one juror's perception and in my book, it furnishes insight into how a jury can earnestly desire a conviction because to do so solves the crime, not because the evidence demonstrates it beyond a reasonable doubt. (Continued…)
Stiv
posted 11/15/07 @ 9:20 AM EST
Rather than tie up the system yet again (already this is pretty much a travesty) just save all the tax payers some money and deport her.
At this point in time it's probably much easier and less time consuming to find a reason for an action of this nature than do go through all the same rigamaroll yet again. (Continued…)
Penn Alum
posted 11/15/07 @ 9:32 AM EST
Why didn't the DP talk to the 2 jurors who voted to acquit to make this a more balanced story?
And yes, each time the prosecution tries this case, the easier it'll be for them to get a conviction. (Continued…)
Kasparov
posted 11/15/07 @ 4:18 PM EST
Most jurors rubber stamp whatever a prosecutor wants and the real burden of proof lies with defendants to not only disprove that they did it, but to inculpate someone else. (Continued…)
Theballer
posted 11/16/07 @ 3:48 AM EST
time to acquit her. Fly away birdie.
johnson
posted 11/16/07 @ 6:23 AM EST
Theballer makes a solid point. Time to acquit son...
Strongly agree with Theballer and johnson
posted 11/16/07 @ 9:31 AM EST
Strongly agree with Theballer and johnson.
It is time to acquit her and let her stay in this country and get her degree from Wharton here at Penn! The one juror DP chose to interview is a complete idiot. (Continued…)
Post a Comment