Seven men, five women seated in jury for federal fraud trial of former Rep. Corrine Brown

Jacksonville, FL — The jury that will sit over the federal fraud trial of now-former Congresswoman Corrine Brown has been chosen.

Seven men and five women are on the panel. Four alternates have also been chosen- not two as the initial court order stated. The alternates will not be told they are alternates ahead of the trial, instead, they’ve been mixed in among the others and the group is sitting as a body of 16.

CONTINUING COVERAGE: The trial of now-former Congresswoman Corrine Brown

US Magistrate Judge James Klindt, who presided over the two-and-a-half day selection process, says they sat four alternates because of the anticipated length of the trial- at three weeks.

By the observation of our reporter in the courtroom, the 12 person panel appears to be three white females, five white males, two black females, one black male, and one Hispanic male. Nine of the jurors live in Jacksonville, one in Bunnell, one in Middleburg, and one couldn't be determined by our reporter because it was not clearly stated by the juror.

The defense was allowed to make ten strikes “without cause” and the prosecution had six, but neither side used all of those strikes before agreeing on the panel.

US District Judge Timothy Corrigan- who is presiding over the trial- took the bench for the first time just ahead of 11:15AM Wednesday, had the jury sworn in, and then issued instructions to the panel.

The instructions included reinforcing that the jurors cannot speak to anyone about the case, and that none of the parties involved in the case should be approaching them through the trial itself. The jury will not be sequestered, but has been repeatedly instructed not to seek out any news reports about this case or discuss the case with anyone.

“Our whole system depends upon the fact that this case is decided in this courtroom on the evidence in this courtroom, and nothing else,” Corrigan told the jury.

Corrigan further started to explain the prosecution's burden to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt", and that there is no obligation on the defense to prove anything. Jurors will be given notepads and paper during the trial, but those are taken from them at the end of the day every day.

JUROR DETAILS: 

Juror 1- black male from Jacksonville, high school education, single and never married. He works in merchandising for a soda company. He served on a criminal jury in state court about ten years ago, and they were able to reach a verdict. This juror said he had some prior knowledge of this case from watching the news, but had no more details than the case statement delivered by Klindt and had not formed any opinion on guilty or innocence. Two of this juror’s cousins and two of his friends have been arrested- a cousin was arrested in the 1980s and did 27 years for drug possession, a cousin was locked up in the 1980s for a robbery, a friend was arrested for murder in 1993 and sentenced to life in prison, and another friend was arrested for molestation in the last five years. This juror says these cases wouldn’t influence him, because the people involved were guilty and he would be able to set those cases out of mind to focus on these proceedings.

Juror 2- white male from Jacksonville, high school education with some college, married with one 23-year-old child. He works in sales and his wife is a homemaker. He has been a juror on a criminal case in state court, and they did reach a verdict. This juror said he had met Brown once in the past when he got the chance to be in a luxury box his company owns, but that meeting does not influence how he views Brown.

Juror 3, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 9- black female from Jacksonville, associates degree, divorced with two children- a 4-year-old and a 9-year-old. She is recently unemployed, but previously worked as a registration analyst for a mortgage company and leasing agent at an apartment complex. This juror was a victim of a crime by her ex-husband, with the details of that crime being discussed during a private sidebar with the judge and attorneys.

Juror 4, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 12- white male from Bunnell, high school education, divorced with a 30-year-old son. He was a factory worker and previously served four years in the Army. This juror said he had some prior knowledge of this case based on a comment his sister-in-law made when he received a jury summons, but he had not otherwise paid attention to the case nor did he have an opinion about it. This juror’s brother was arrested in the 70s after drunkenly shooting up a man’s car in a retaliatory act, but he says that wouldn’t influence him because he didn’t follow the case closely since he was serving in Korea.

Juror 7, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 13- white male from Jacksonville, Bachelor’s degree in Communications, married. He is currently a hair stylist and his spouse is with an insurance group. This juror said he has some knowledge of the case because he watches the news nightly and he is active on social media, but he hasn’t formed an opinion on the case because he hasn’t looked in to it in depth.

Juror 8, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 17- white female from Jacksonville, high school education with some college, widow. She is a real estate property manager. She was a juror in a criminal case in state court in 2014, and they were able to reach a verdict.

Juror 9, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 19- black female from Jacksonville, Bachelor’s degree in Respiratory Science, married with one son. She served in the Navy for 21 years and her husband is retired Navy as well. She now works in the respiratory science field. This juror’s brother was tried and convicted of attempted manslaughter in the early 80s. She says her family doesn’t talk about it, so she hasn’t formed any opinions about it.

Juror 10, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 23- white female from Jacksonville, Bachelor’s degree in Business, married with three children. Her children as a 26-year-old waiter, a 23-year-old who works in a grocery store, and an 18-year-old graduating high school. She works in sales support for an insurance company and her husband grades essays for standardized tests. She served on a jury in a state criminal case in Indiana, and they were able to reach a verdict. This juror said she had some prior knowledge of the case because she reads the paper daily, but she stopped reading any articles about the case when she received her summons about a month ago. She did not have any opinion on the case.

Juror 13, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 26- white male from Middleburg, high school education with some college, married with three daughters- a paralegal, a waitress, and one who does financial work in the medical field. He is unemployed, but previously worked for a mortgage investor company. He has prior military experience of 13.5 years at Cecil Field.

Juror 14, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 35- white female from Jacksonville, high school education with some college, married with two kids- a 13-year-old and a 19-year-old college student. She is a service consultant for an insurance company and her spouse is self-employed in landscaping. This juror says she has some prior knowledge of the case, but only that she had heard on the news that there was a trial.

Juror 15, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 39- white male, Associates degree, single. Works for the Department of Transportation. This juror says he has some prior knowledge of the case from watching the news, but hadn’t heard many specifics. Friends had joked that he could potentially be on the jury, but it’s nothing that led him to form an opinion. This juror has a family member that worked for a county sheriff’s office, but that has no impact on how he views law enforcement.

Juror 16, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 40- Hispanic male from Jacksonville, Bachelor’s degree in Network Technology, married with three children- a 33-year-old case manager with DCF, a 31-year-old in the armed forces, and a 25-year-old in college. He works as a shift supervisor at a youth camp in Starke and his wife is a school teacher. He served 44 years in the military.

ALTERNATE JUROR DETAILS:

Juror 5, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 44- Hispanic male from Jacksonville, Bachelor’s in Communications, married with an 11-month-old daughter. He works as a Continuity Director with a media group and his wife owns a bed-and-breakfast. This juror says he knows one of the prospective witnesses, John Delaney, from having served as Vice President of UNF’s student government, but that was about seven years ago and it would not influence the weight and consideration he gave to Delaney’s testimony.

Juror 6, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 50- female of apparent East Asian descent from St. Johns County, high school education and some college, married with three children- one is a former Marine and current firefighter, one is a Marine, and one is a student. She has previously worked in account receivables, merchandising, and as a youth service worker. This juror says she has some prior knowledge of the case from watching the news daily, but she mostly consumes traffic and weather and had only heard generally about this trial. She has not formed any opinion and will weigh only the evidence presented at trial.

Juror 11, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 51- white male from Palm Coast, Masters in Business Administration, married with three children- ages 13, 11, and 6. He is a medical surgical rep and his wife is a homemaker. He served on a criminal jury in a case in Flagler County four years ago, and they reached a verdict.

Juror 12, who was identified in jury selection as Juror 52- black female from East Palatka, high school education with some college, divorced with one 41-year-old son who’s a bus driver in New York. She is a lab analyst. She has previously served on a jury on a state criminal, but the case settled. This juror says she has some prior knowledge of the case from seeing a little on the news, but she hasn’t discussed the case with anyone, nor has she formed an opinion. This juror answered affirmatively that she, a close friend, or family member had been arrested for a crime, but the specific details were discussed in a private sidebar with the judge and attorneys.