Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Weberman juror:Facts caused conviction not religion

NY Daily News    "It wasn't religion, it wasn't their background, it wasn't revenge," said the 42-year-old man, who asked not to be identified. "It was a young girl and an old man alone in a room."

Weberman’s lawyer George Farkas had claimed after the conviction that Hasidic Jews do not have “the same shot with a jury as anyone else."

But the juror said he had no preconceptions about Weberman's community, adding the panel didn't view him as "a monster."

"We realized we couldn't make a flippant decision and ruin a man's life," the juror recalled. "It was, 'Oh boy, we have a serious job.'"

The juror said the panel accepted the victim's "emotional" testimony, which stretched over four days, but didn't want to rely solely on her words.

“Something else” came in the form of social worker Sara Fried, who testified she diagnosed the girl with post traumatic stress disorder over the years of molestation.

"That's what clinched it," the juror said during an hour-long interview at a Brooklyn diner last week. "We took the vote and everyone was unanimous."

He also noted there were multiple locks in Weberman's home, that he admitted to driving the girl upstate alone and that he housed other runaway teens.  [...]


  1. If Farkas didn't trust a jury he could have asked for a bench trail. It's a lot harder to defend a lying criminal in front of a bench of judges, isn't it Farkas?

    1. It isn't "judges", as a bench trial is with a single judge with all his biases. And this judge having shown extreme anti-defense biases with his various rulings, that would've been a bad idea (without 20/20 hindsight.)

  2. Here we go again:


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.