Drew Ryser, the former Houston police officer convicted last month for his role in the videotaped beating of teenager Chad Holley, has asked for a new trial, alleging the jury foreman in his trial researched the case on the Internet.
Lawyers for Ryser filed a motion for a new trial on Wednesday, alleging juror misconduct.
Foreman Jan Goehring is accused of researching the case online after a day of deliberating then discussing it with the other jurors the next day, which may have swayed at least one juror to convict the officer.
"Bringing something into the jury room that didn't come from the evidence or testimony is called 'outside influence' and the law is clear," said Lisa Andrews, one of Ryser's attorneys. "Drew Ryser deserves a new trial because the jury foreman did his own research."
In June, a six-person jury deliberated more than 10 hours over two days before finding Ryser guilty of official oppression, essentially mistreating a suspect in custody.
Among the things Ryser's attorneys say the foreman looked up include a definition of the word "mistreatment." The word was not defined for the jury because it was a central issue in the case. Goehring apparently brought a computer printout of a definition he found on the Internet, according to court records.
Earlier in the deliberations, according to Wednesday's motion, the foreman also told the other jurors that a "friend" told him not to worry about Ryser because "he has a job and has moved on with his life."
Court records filed Wednesday include affidavits from two jurors swearing that Goehring brought outside information in, and one juror said it swayed her to convict.
"I had a reasonable doubt about Officer Ryser's guilt, but this definition (of "mistreatment") affected my decision by finally convincing me to vote guilty," the juror wrote in her affidavit.
Goehring could not be reached for comment.
Andrews noted that state District Judge Ruben Guerrero continually admonished the jury during the weeklong trial not to do any research, including driving by the scene, Internet research or talking to people about the case.
"This juror clearly violated the judge's orders," Andrews said. "And he appeared to know more about the case than the other jurors."
Because the charges were misdemeanors, the jury was made up of six people instead of 12.
Special prosecutor Tommy LaFon said he saw the motion late Wednesday but had not begun to investigate the allegations.
"It's something that we need to look at and ascertain exactly what's going on," LaFon said. "That's the whole purpose for a motion for new trial, to flesh out what the allegation is. Until we know more details, we don't know the issue is."
Legal experts said Ryser may well get a new trial if the allegations are true.
"I think it's a problem," said Geoffrey S. Corn, a professor at the South Texas College of Law. "If they violated the judge's instructions, and there's an affidavit that said it had a decisive influence on one of the jurors, I don't think he got fair process. You're entitled to due process."
Corn said jurors are not allowed to consult external sources because they have to make their decision based only on the evidence that the judge has ruled is admissible and relevant.
"Basically, that kind of information is 'outside' the jury room, so it would be a proper grounds for the judge to inquire about it," said University of Houston law professor Sandra Guerra Thompson. "If it did occur, the judge would have to decide whether it affected the verdict."
After he was convicted, Ryser agreed to a sentence of six months in jail, probated for two years, which means he serves no jail time but will be on probation until 2015. He also agreed to pay a $1,000 fine. Two other HPD officers have pleaded guilty to misdemeanors in connection with the March 23, 2010, beating caught on video.
Copyright 2013 - Houston Chronicle
McClatchy-Tribune News Service
