John Gotti Jr. Jury Says Deadlocked Again

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 06:37:33 PM EST
Tags: John Gotti, Jr. (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The Government ought to give John Gotti, Jr. a rest. After 9 days of deliberations in a 4th retrial, the jury announced it was deadlocked. But the Judge gave them the dynamite charge, rather than let them go.

The end seemed near for the fourth racketeering trial of Gotti when the jury said it could not reach a unanimous verdict in a note late in its ninth day of deliberations, a record for the Gotti trials. Gotti, 45, blew a kiss to his family before taking his seat.

After rejecting a defense request to declare a mistrial, U.S. District Judge Kevin P. Castel summoned the jury and delivered a so-called Allen charge, instructing jurors to try hard once more to come to a consensus.

[More...]

"This trial has been conducted at considerable expense and human effort to both the government and the defendant," the judge told them. "If your deliberations do not end in a verdict, in all likelihood it would have to be tried again before another jury."

Enough already. At least one on the jury believes he had withdrawn from the mob when the murders were committed.

Gotti's attorney Charles Carnesi said his client quit the Mafia in 1999 and never participated in murders. When he requested a mistrial Tuesday, Carnesi said it would be coercive to force the jury to continue deliberations.

Background on the case is here. (And yes, that's really my tee-shirt that I got at the Feast of San Gennaro festival in New York around 1995....but it refers to his father.)

< Frontline Special Tonight on Credit Card Industry | Tuesday Night Open Thread: DWTS Finale >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

John Gotti Jr. Jury Says Deadlocked Again | 5 comments (5 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Amen Jeralyn.... (none / 0) (#1)
by kdog on Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 06:47:07 PM EST

Gotti Jr's wife was quoted in the paper today and made what I thought was a brilliant point, I paraphrase..."to spend millions of taxpayer dollars trying to convict her husband for the 4th time is the real crime"...ain't that the freakin' truth, this taxpayer surely agrees.

Whoever said hell wrath no fury like a woman scorned obviously never met a scorned prosecutor...its downright pathetic to see a personal vendetta play out in the supposed hallowed halls of justice...pathetic.

And once again the state jumps in bed with the worst to get the bad...first Gravano, now Allite or whoever the hell the star witness/admitted multiple murderer is this go round.

Will we ever get around to hassling the real gangsters I wonder? Even if Gotti Jr. is exactly who prosecutors say he is, he's small potatos compared to the real gangsters.

As a taxpayer (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by nyjets on Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 08:32:45 PM EST

As a taxpayer I have no problems with the government going after alleged criminals like Gotti Jr.
He is a real gangster that the government should go after. Furthermore, just because some criminals get away with there crimes does not mean the 'small potatoes' should get away with theirs.


: unfortunately you are probable correct (none / 0) (#5)
by nyjets on Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 08:54:27 PM EST

You are probably right. Innocent or guilty, it is probable time to drop the case and pursue other lines of of inquiries. Four hung juries says it all.
Part of the problem I will admit is I hate the way his father is revered. The man was an alleged murder and mobster and yet people act like he was a victim. So this does color my vision (which is why I could never serve on a jury for any case involving the Gotti's :))

four hung juries (none / 0) (#2)
by diogenes on Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 07:37:02 PM EST

What this means is that four times a number or jurors die not find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt; for all we know those jurors not voting guilty would vote guilty by clear and convincing evidence. It may cheaper to give up now since the case is likely unwinnable in front of a jury, but this is hardly one of those cases where the jury walks out in ten minutes declaring innocent in the first trial and you wonder why the prosecution was brought up in the first place.

I agree (none / 0) (#6)
by Mikeb302000 on Thu Nov 26, 2009 at 06:48:12 AM EST

he walks.