Maketa retrial: Jury selection day two

Former El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa is being retried on four charges that left a previous jury unable to reach a verdict.

Last summer, a jury deadlocked on charges of extortion, conspiracy to commit extortion, and two counts of official misconduct.

Maketa is accused of abusing his authority and misusing public funds.

Wednesday marks day two of jury selection. The 90 person pool filled out a questionnaire about their previous knowledge of the case and their ability to be impartial.

They are being individually questioned about their responses to the questionnaire.

Maketa’s defense attorneys have argued since his first trial that they would not be able to get an unbiased jury in El Paso County because of media coverage, but day one of jury pool questioning indicated otherwise.

Many of the potential jurors couldn’t remember what exactly happened that brought Maketa to court. Some thought it was misuse of power but couldn’t remember specifics, others remembered something happening with a female employee. Several thought there were sexual improprieties. One potential juror even thought Maketa had something to do with starting “the fire.”

On day two, potential jurors were questioned about their previous knowledge of the case and what they’ve read in the media. Several were asked about their past experience with the legal system and how that would affect their ability to be fair and impartial.

One man was a firefighter who worked the Black Forest Fire. He didn’t have any experiences with Maketa during that time. He said he could remain unbiased, but he did know two of the witnesses called in Maketa’s previous trial.

Six potential jurors have been dismissed so far. One was dismissed because of a “serious bladder issue” that he felt would affect his concentration. Another was dismissed because he is getting surgery to remove hardware from his collarbone after breaking it. One was dismissed for bias against Maketa, after calling his behavior “wicked.”

Just before group questioning began, another prospective juror, a CSPD officer’s wife, was dismissed because she was subpoenaed for a case in California.

Prosecutor Mark Hulbert began voir dire, or the preliminary examination of the jury pool. He explained that it means “to tell the truth,” and that’s exactly what he expected the pool to do.

He asked the pool if they understood reasonable doubt and why the prosecution has to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt to ensure they’d be able to follow the law. He also wants to make sure prosecution wouldn’t be held to an unreasonable standard.

Next, prosecution asked about the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence. He also questioned how jurors would be able to determine a witness’ credibility? One pool member said body language. Another said people remember incidents differently than one another, but it doesn’t mean their account isn’t credible.

Hulbert then moved on to the topic of sexual harassment. He asked if anyone had experienced sexual harassment and would not be able to hear allegations of it during the trial. No one raised their hand.

After, he asked the pool: what is a conspiracy? Conspiracy is one of the charges Maketa is facing. One potential juror answered that people got together to decide to commit a crime.

Hulbert later asked how do you prove intent? A pool member said to look at their body language. Then Hulbert asked if there was anyone that thought the crime and intent couldn’t be proven. No one raised their hand.

One juror took a moment to say he felt how important it was to come to the verdict and that he was happy to be in the courtroom participating.

The court took a break, and then defense had their turn to question.

Maketa’s attorney, David Kaplan, started by asking who has had to supervise someone in any way? Who has been supervised? Nearly everyone raised their hand.

Then he dove into what it takes to supervise. Pool members answered: education, competency, being a role model. He asked about the difficulties. One man said hiring or firing someone. Kaplan asked even if that would make people angry, is that any reason not to do it? The man answered: no.

Kaplan didn’t shy away from his real questions when he asked: what are your responsibilities as a leader in law enforcement? One man answered, “You’ve got people’s lives in danger.” Another woman agreed saying, “That’s a huge responsibility.”

Kaplan asked: so do you always get it right? One man replied, “I wouldn’t guess you would.”

These questions are similar to Kaplan’s opening statements at Maketa’s last trial, where he argued the ex-lawman was unfairly criticized for making tough decisions that were just part of the job.

The jury was seated just before 5 p.m. It is made up of eight women and six men, including the two alternates.

Opening arguments are set to begin Thursday.