University of Virginia Library

Strategy Based Upon Jury Selection
In Possible Appeal Of Doran Conviction

NEWS ANALYSIS

By Donn Kessler
and
Peter Shea
Cavalier Daily Staff Writers

Tom Doran, the former University
student convicted Tuesday of perjury,
will probably appeal his trial based upon
objections made by his attorney, John
Lowe.

Mr. Lowe stated yesterday that there
is a "high probability" of appeal of the
decision based upon the rejection of his
pretrial objections to 'discriminatory'
jury selection, jury questioning, 'selective
prosecution' and the introduction of tape
recordings as evidence.

During the pretrial hearing, Mr. Lowe
had asked for a copy of the national jury
list, a list of all people eligible for jury selection
in order to see if the list represented a
cross-section of Mr. Doran's community.

The motion was overruled by Judge George
M. Coles. Judge Coles stated that Virginia State
law prescribed the procedure that was followed
in the jury selection.

Mr. Lowe also objected during the pretrial
session to the state's system of jury selection.
He stated that it was discriminatory against,
blacks, women, and the young.

The defense attorney also challenged the
constitutionality of the method of questioning
of prospective jurors. Mr. Lowe stated that he
felt that counsel should have the right to
question each juror individually.

Virginia state law prescribes that jurors can
only be questioned en masse.

Mr. Lowe also objected to the trial itself
stating that it was "selective prosecution." He
claimed that there had been very few, if any,
trials in the area before now that involved
perjury. He contended that Mr. Doran was
being picked on by being tried on such a
charge.

The court then stated that because Mr.
Doran had testified in an earlier case that he
had not broken any windows in Cabell Hall
during the strike last spring and was convicted
of such charges, he had obviously lied.

John Camblos, the Commonwealth's
Attorney for Charlottesville, explained that this
was not the contention of the prosecution. He
said that his case was based upon the fact that
Mr. Doran had testified that he had not been in
Cabell Hall at the time of the vandalism but
that two witnesses had said they had seen him
in the building.

Mr. Lowe also objected to tape recordings
introduced by the prosecution in evidence
against Mr. Doran. The tapes were recordings of
Mr. Doran's testimony in his original trial for
vandalism.

The defense attorney claimed that the tapes
had breaks in them and had not been locked up
prior to Tuesday's trial.