PETA Trial, Day 2:

Can We Please Agree on a Jury?

January 23, 2007 | Day Two at the PETA-Kills-Animals trial of Adria Hinkle and Andrew Cook was best summed up by one candidate for a slot as an alternate juror (think First Runner-Up for Miss America, without the sash and bouquet). When a defense attorney asked if he thought he could give the court his "full and undivided attention, as long as we keep it interesting," the juror shot back in good humor: "More interesting than the last two days, I hope."

He made the cut. But as the North Carolina county of Hertford waits patiently for a trial that has been postponed seven times already, the tedium of jury selection delayed the proceedings again. We started the day with eight confirmed jurors and ended with a full panel of twelve (plus two alternates). But lawyers questioned -- and rejected -- another nine people along the way.

One would-be juror brought an admirable point of view to the courtroom. After the judge instructed the other jurors to wait in an adjacent room, she had this to say about PETA:

From what I've read, I just feel like it's a radical group ... I mean, the animal testing, to me, from what I believe that they think, I feel like you can test on an animal for good, for medicine or whatever, and that there's nothing wrong with that … I'm a healthcare worker, and I'm for preserving health and for taking away people's pain.

PETA's lawyers scratched her from the list. To be fair, she probably wasn't the sort of unbiased arbitrator envisioned by the designers of our jury system, but her frankness was the high point of an otherwise dull day.

Another dismissed juror told the court: "I'm embarrassed to tell you I have seven dogs. I have four cats, a rabbit, and a fish." Lawyers for the animal lovers at PETA weren't the slightest bit embarassed to tell her to take a hike.

The final jury includes three people PETA might be a bit worried about, as they work for a nearby chicken-processing plant.

Yesterday's big news, the revelation that prosecutors can tie Hinkle and Cook to more animal-dumping incidents than those observed by police, remains in play. This afternoon, Judge Cy Grant ruled against a defense motion to exclude that evidence. With two words -- "That's denied" -- he virtually guaranteed jurors will hear evidence about just how big the PETA Problem in North Carolina really is.

Incidentally, our nod (so far) for sound-bite-of-the-week goes to PETA lawyer Phil Hirschkop, who told Raleigh's News & Observer on Sunday that Hinkle and Cook "never should have done it, but this is not the crime of the century.

Let's put Hirschkop's logic to the test:

PETA believes animals and people have equal value.
The group regularly compares livestock slaughter to the Nazi Holocaust.
Two of its employees allegedly killed 31 animals and tossed their bodies into a dumpster.
If animals are indeed equal to human beings, but killing and dumping 31 of them isn't the crime of the century, then what is?

Tomorrow the real fireworks begin, as opening arguments start at 9:30am. Although the trial so far has been tedious, the idea of the trial is generating more and more interest. If you were watching the Fox News Channel's "Special Report with Brit Hume" on Tuesday night, you saw just how explosive this story promises to be.

Keep watching this space for the latest from scenic Winton, North Carolina. And click below for the most recent major-media reports about the trial:

The News & Observer (Raleigh, NC)
The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA)
The Associated Press
The New York Post
Special Report with Brit Hume (The Fox News Channel)
WAVY-TV (Hampton Roads, VA)
WNCT-TV (Hampton Roads, VA)
Our full-page New York Times ad