Judge questions members of Ivan Brooks jury about misconduct allegations

Questions of possible juror misconduct arose Wednesday less than a day into deliberations to decide the guilt or innocence of murder suspect Ivan Brooks, threatening to derail his weeklong retrial in Lorain County Common Pleas Court. The jury already was having difficulty reaching a unanimous verdict when the controversy erupted. Shortly before 2 p.m., the panel of seven women and five men sent Judge Melissa Kobasher a note saying they were deadlocked on a verdict. She read them the first part of what is called a "Howard charge," asking the jury to go back and make an attempt at deliberating and resolving their differences. It wasn't known if the jury was leaning toward a not-guilty verdict or a guilty verdict. During careful questioning of several members of the jury, the judge made certain that information didn't leak out. Approximately two hours after the jury sent the first note about being deadlocked, Kobasher read a second note she received to defense attorneys Giovanna Bremke and Denise Wilms and Assistant Lorain County Prosecutors Matt Kern and Rick Raley. "The jury is not coming to an agreement on guilty or not guilty. We have exhausted the evidence, read the instructions of law to the jury and reviewed the charges," the note read. "We have a juror that feels attacked personally and claims is trying to be coerced into a decision. Others claimed a juror said 'I made my mind up a few days ago.' 'Two days' was heard." The note was signed by the foreperson, Juror No. 6, whom Kobasher brought into the courtroom for questioning out of earshot of the other jurors. Kobasher assured the parties she was going to be careful not to ask the status of the deliberations, only "to ensure no juror misconduct." The foreperson told Kobasher that during deliberations, Juror No. 10 told other jurors she made her mind up "two days ago" or "a few days ago." He said she participated "very little" in deliberations on Wednesday after making those statements. Juror No. 10 "participated early" Wednesday, but "as the day went on it's become, um, less," the foreperson told Kobasher. "Did you feel they had made up their mind or that they are not participating any further because they're not in agreement necessarily, or because they are refusing to participate?" Kobasher asked him. "I think they made up their mind," the foreperson said. Kobasher then had Juror No. 10 brought in and questioned her. She told Kobasher she felt personally attacked and also that she had made up her mind following brief deliberations Tuesday night, shortly after the jury was handed the case. Asked if the note was accurate, Juror No. 10 told the judge, "Everything I say they yell back at me like I'm wrong. Like they're attacking me," she said. Once Kobasher finished questioning Juror No. 10, Bremke asked the judge to declare a mistrial based on the juror's statements. Kern told Kobasher he and Raley "don't believe that a mistrial is necessary" and that such talk was "premature." "The juror came in and told the court that the nature of the 'attacks' she was feeling were jurors arguing. It didn't sound like there was any kind of misconduct happening back in the jury room," Kern said. "It's a jury trial in a murder case. Tensions are probably a little high back there amongst 12 people. That's why they make movies about jury deliberations." Kobasher denied the motion for a mistrial. She then had the jury brought back into the courtroom and read them the second part of the Howard charge: "It is conceivable that after a reasonable length of time, honest differences of opinion on the evidence may prevent an agreement on a verdict. When that condition exists, you may consider whether further deliberations will serve a useful purpose," Kobasher read. "If you decide that you cannot agree and that further deliberations will not serve a useful purpose, you may ask to be returned to the courtroom and report that back to the court. If there is a possibility of reaching a verdict, you should continue your deliberation." By 5 p.m., jurors told the judge they wanted to continue deliberating. She released them for the day with orders to come back this morning to continue deliberations. That wasn't the end of the controversy. Mother's allegation Under oath, Ivan Brooks' mother, Tina Brooks, testified before the judge that she heard two or three jurors, including Juror No. 10, discussing the case outside the jury room during a smoke break Wednesday afternoon. "I heard her say: 'I don't care what they say. I heard her tell multiple lies, I caught her in multiple lies, and I'm not gonna agree with it,'" Tina Brooks told the judge, quoting Juror No. 10. She said the juror was speaking to another juror "kinda angry," while Kobasher's bailiff Yolanda Minnich was standing nearby during the smoke break. Multiple times during the trial, the judge instructed the jury not to discuss the case with anyone except fellow jurors, and even then not anywhere but the jury room. Tina Brooks took what she allegedly heard to other family members and to Wilms, one of her son's two attorneys. Kobasher asked the defense why the matter "was not brought to the court's attention" sooner, until more than an hour after it happened. Bremke said she and Wilms sat down to talk with Tina Brooks so she could tell them both what she allegedly heard before bringing it up in court. Minnich told the judge she took jurors 7, 10, and 12 downstairs for a smoke break after lunch Wednesday. "One of them went off a bit further, that was No. 10," and she "might've been on her phone, I'm not 100 percent sure," Minnich said. "One of them also said something about going by the scene of the crime, if she was allowed to, and the other one told her, 'No, you're not supposed to do anything like that,'" Minnich told Kobasher. "But she said she didn't do it, she just asked." Kobasher said the court would question the jury about the matter this morning. "I believe it's something we'll have to address with individual interviews with the jurors in the morning. I believe that will be the appropriate way to proceed," she said. Background Ivan Brooks, 38, of Lorain, is charged with aggravated murder, murder, felonious assault, improperly discharging a firearm, and related specifications in the March 2019 shooting death of 45-year-old Terrence Taylor. He is accused of shooting and killing Taylor in the entryway of 841 Broad St. in Elyria early on the morning of March 19, 2019. Taylor's girlfriend, Byanka Tavarez, who is also Ivan Brooks' ex-girlfriend and the mother of two of his children, told Elyria police she saw Ivan Brooks shoot Taylor. Police and prosecutors said the motive was Ivan Brooks' jealousy that Taylor and Tavarez were dating. The defense argued during his five-day trial that no physical evidence collected by police linked Ivan Brooks to the killing, only Tavarez's word and circumstantial evidence. Ivan Brooks turned himself into federal authorities in Cincinnati nine days after the murder. He has been in jail ever since. It is the second time Ivan Brooks has gone on trial on those charges. His first murder trial ended in a mistrial by hung jury in Judge James Miraldi's courtroom in November 2021. Contact Dave O'Brien at (440) 329-7129 or dobrien@chroniclet.com. Follow him on Twitter @DaveOBrienCT.