Alford – A case of “eviction” took place here Monday when Perry Sweet and his wife were taken from their home, the Lackawanna railroad [D L & W]taking possession of their property. The scene was slightly dramatic and highly humorous in a way. The railroad’s attorney and detectives were star actors. The railroad had sought to purchase this property but terms could not be agreed upon. When it became evident that condemnation proceedings would be brought by the company, Mrs. Sweet, who holds title to the property, brought suit in equity, through her attorneys C. L. VanScoten and G. P. Little, asking for an injunction, claiming that the railroad had absolutely no right to touch her property under its charter and that the new line was an independent railroad. At 10:30 Monday morning, four or five railroad men asked Mr. Sweet if he would not vacate and he refused. Mr. Sweet then took his position in the side door of the house with a big, ugly-looking revolver. A “council of war” was held by the railroad men, and about half an hour later, 15 or 20 additional railway men, and a detective, appeared and they went up to Mr. Sweet, took his gun from him, and marched him across the street. They also took Mrs. Sweet from the house and then removed their goods, and immediately began despoiling the property. Mr. and Mrs. Sweet are highly respected citizens of Alford, and have occupied this home for 43 years. Mr. Sweet’s friends say that the house is not in the line of the new cut-off, nor will it have to be moved, but that the railroad wanted to purchase it for their own use. A pathetic part of the scene was the sobbing of Mrs. Sweet when they began tearing down the home they had occupied so long. The house is a large, three-story affair, and we are informed that a spring of water upon it is a very valuable one. Mr. and Mrs. Sweet will store their goods for a time and then move to Clarks Summit, we understand. The answer to the bill in equity was filed and will come up for disposal in the November court. If a permanent injunction is granted the railroad would have to restore the property and pay all damages. If refused the value of the property will be decided by condemnation proceedings. The Sweet’s were offered $3600 Later: We understand that J. M. Decker has settled with the Lackawanna for the right-of-way across his property and that the company paid Mr. Decker $5,000 for same and Mr. Decker takes off and retains three of the buildings which were in the path of the cut-off operations. Mr. Decker will occupy his fine residence above the D, L. & W. station, at present occupied by station agent Trump.

Franklin Forks – Franklin M. Gardiner, Esq., of Forest City, declined to run on the Washington ticket in opposition to Hon. E. E. Jones for representative. George P. Stockholm has been named by the nominating committee to fill the vacancy. Mr. Stockholm is a popular Farmers’ Alliance man in Franklin Forks, with a large acquaintance, and served with credit in the Civil War. His friends will enthusiastically rally to his support.

Royal, Clifford Twp. – Ora Bennett purchased of Web Kinyon, of Greenfield, a very valuable horse the other day, paying $250 for it. He is what the boys call a “Jim Dandy.” It pleases Ora to draw the reins over the nicest horse in town.

Dimock – A sharp ball game was held on the large grass meadow of W. L. Stilwell, on Saturday, between South Montrose and Dimock boys, which resulted in favor of South Montrose.

New Milford – A very sad accident and one that should be a lesson to all, occurred at the home of Olney Very when his little four year old girl found her grandmother, Mrs. Theron Very’s, medicine, taking as much as she cared to and dying in a few hours. She was an exceptionally bright child and universally loved. Also Angelo Julian, contractor to furnish the common laborers, was here this week and reports hard and slow work getting men to work on the cut-off.

Elk Lake – Frank Arnold and H. T. Fargo have each lost a horse.

Glenwood – Will Gow, of Cameron Corners, lost a horse by falling from a ledge a few days ago. ALSO Anna Tripp is able to attend school again after an absence of a few days from the result of an auto accident. If auto tourists would travel with less speed they could avoid such accidents.

Montrose – Saturday afternoon last, a man drove his team and wagon across the Country Club links. Whether to save time or in a willful abandon of the Club’s postings we do not know, but the journey was an expensive one. The case was settled out of court for $10.00 or $1000 (?) [Unclear.] Each year $500 or more is paid out that these grounds may be kept in the best possible condition for the game of golf and the members of the Club elect their Governors for that purpose. ALSO The increasing popularity of Lake Avenue causes it frequently to be spoken of and the way it came by its present name may be of interest to some of our readers, besides giving credit publicly to a former, now deceased, popular and public spirited citizen, the late Henry C. Tyler, whose residence was on that street, then called North Main Street. Mr. Tyler thought it would be nice to change the name and circulated a petition asking it to be changed by the Borough Council to “Lake Avenue,” which was done, perhaps thirty years ago. [Besides, it does go to the lake.]

Ararat Summit – Ronald Walker, who has been working as telegrapher at Forest City Station, the past three months, is now working in the station at Starrucca.

Little Meadows – Patrick McNamara is confined to his home with an attack of quinsy. ALSO Mary McNamara has purchased a new piano.

Flynn – Thomas McDonough has traded his horse for a motorcycle. Tom is going to get after them soon.

Jackson – The body of Charles Hard was brought to Susquehanna for burial on September 8. His home was in Oklahoma. ALSO The death of Edwin Bowell occurred very suddenly while working on the road, Monday, Sept. 16th, 1912, near W. W. Pope’s undertaking rooms. The deceased had a stroke about 10 o’clock and died at 12 o’clock. He leaves two sons, Frank and Clarence, both of Susquehanna, and one daughter, Mrs. John Skillett, of Ohio. Funeral and burial today, at Gelatt, at 10 o’clock.

Brooklyn – Murray Palmer left this week to resume his studies at Staunton Military Academy in Virginia.

Earlier this year, a reader sent me an article from the Wall Street Journal regarding the disturbing trend of problems with jurors using social media during trials. If you have ever served on a jury in a criminal case, you know that part of the instructions that a judge gives you is to refrain from discussing the case with anyone, including other jurors, family and friends, until such time as the case is over, the jury is properly instructed, and the jury deliberations have officially commenced. I have never had the privilege of serving on a jury, but I suspect that this particular instruction is difficult for most people. A lot of us like to work problems through by discussing them with family and friends – bouncing thoughts and conclusions off others helps us gauge our own positions and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of our arguments. In fact, the famous play “12 Angry Men” made the “investigative” juror into something of a hero – the one person committed to preventing a miscarriage of justice. In reality, the integrity of the criminal justice system depends upon the impartiality of the jury – and that impartiality of the jury rests upon the ability to avoid outside influences improperly impacting upon that jury.

As social media has developed, prosecutors, defense attorneys and judges in the criminal justice system are all discovering that some jurors simply ignore the court’s instruction in a very blatant way. Some jurors have posted trial updates on their Twitter or Facebook accounts throughout the proceeding. In one particular case out of Arkansas, a murder conviction was overturned because one of the jurors was “tweeting” during trial, i.e., posting things on his Twitter account in the middle of the trial, and the juror continued to do this even after being admonished by the judge to stop that activity. Based upon reports, this particular juror posted the jury’s verdict on his Twitter account before it had even been publicly read in the courtroom. The appellate court reversed the first-degree murder conviction based upon “juror misconduct.”

What is the response to this type of conduct? First, judges are now updating their instructions to make certain that jurors understand that the trial proceedings cannot be discussed on social media outlets. Second, the courts are struggling with the extent to which juror social media must be monitored to assure that the integrity of the jury process is maintained. For instance, some attorneys have suggested that jurors should be required to provide social media information to allow the court and litigants access for purposes of review. This proposed oversight raises significant privacy concerns that would likely upset most potential jurors. These privacy concerns have to be weighed against the integrity of the jury system and the overarching goal of assuring that a criminal defendant receives a fair trial by an impartial jury of his or her peers.

When faced with jurors who have used social media during a trial, the courts have taken different approaches to the problem. Some courts have simply removed the offending juror from the case, replaced the juror with an alternative juror and the trial continued. Some courts have spoken to the juror about the impropriety of the conduct, but continued to allow the juror to serve on the jury. Other courts have declared a mistrial – which means the case is done and the jury is discharged and the entire thing has to start over again. Finally, there was one court reported as holding the offending juror in contempt of the court’s instructions and directing the juror to pay a fine. Given the advances in social media, this particular issue will likely be a growing trend creating difficulties for the criminal justice system.

In the article, there was one law professor who suggested that courts need to “start treating jurors less like children.” This particular law professor suggested that the courts should not only instruct jurors to refrain from discussing the case while the trial is pending, but explain that the reason for that prohibition is to assure that the defendant receives a fair trial independent of any outside influences or premature deliberations. Frankly, I believe that the general instruction already does a pretty good job of explaining to jurors the reasons behind the restrictions placed upon them during the trial. I have never believed that the instructions treated the jurors “like children.” The vast majority of jurors work hard at following the court’s instructions – and it is unlikely that the system will ever be able to wholly prevent a few jurors from breaking the rules. As with any problem, the key is to make sure that when juror misconduct does occur, any prejudice that resulted from it is corrected.

Please submit any questions, concerns, or comments to Susquehanna County District Attorney’s Office, P.O. Box 218, Montrose, Pennsylvania 18801 or at our website www.SusquehannaCounty-DA.org or discuss this and all articles at http://dadesk.blogspot.com/.