Prosecutor gets suspension for invading jury’s ‘inner sanctum’

Dwelling
Each day Information
Prosecutor will get suspension for invading jury’s…

Ethics

Prosecutor will get suspension for invading jury’s ‘interior sanctum’

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 27, 2025, 10:27 am CDT

An Oklahoma lawyer has been suspended for six months for watching real-time jury deliberations on a monitor in a homicide case that he prosecuted.

The Oklahoma Supreme Courtroom suspended former assistant district legal professional Isaac Seth Brantley Shields in a March 25 determination.

The Authorized Occupation Weblog revealed highlights.

Shields violated “the interior sanctum of a jury,” which is “a excessive breach of belief and a severe interference with the administration of justice,” the Oklahoma Supreme Courtroom stated. “It’s common information that observing jury deliberations is unacceptable.”

Shields was accused of watching the deliberations video July 1, 2022, within the trial of Chouteau, Oklahoma, man Robert Kent Kraft, in response to prior protection by KJRH.com. There was no audio, in response to the Oklahoma Supreme Courtroom.

Shields was an assistant district legal professional in Oklahoma’s District 12, which consists of Craig County, Mayes County and Rogers County. He was the lead prosecutor within the trial of Kraft, who claimed that he fatally stabbed one other man in self-defense.

Jurors had been deliberating in an adjoining courtroom to offer them extra space through the COVID-19 pandemic. The room was outfitted with three safety cameras that remained on throughout deliberations. Facial expressions and hand gestures had been seen on the high-quality video, but it surely was not attainable to learn phrases on paper.

Two hours into the deliberations, an officer allowed Shields into the locked safety workplace the place the video performed. Shields claimed that he was requested to enter due to a safety scenario involving the defendant’s household making an attempt to enter the courtroom; safety personnel stated the safety incident occurred hours later, however they didn’t know why Shields was allowed in.

Shields stated he didn’t instantly depart as a result of he was interested in what was taking the jurors so lengthy and since he had nothing else to do, the Oklahoma Supreme Courtroom stated. He left and returned a number of instances. He later instructed one other assistant district legal professional who was the second chair within the trial to come back the safety room. Shields managed the cameras to zoom in and zoom out and mentioned his observations with safety officers and the opposite prosecutor.

At first, there seemed to be a holdout juror, however Kraft was finally convicted of first-degree homicide. His case is on attraction after a mistrial was granted due to the prosecutors’ jury observations.

A deputy reported his considerations concerning the prosecutors watching the video. When requested what occurred, Shields instructed his supervisors that he was within the room for “half-hour. Perhaps slightly extra, perhaps rather less,” in response to the Oklahoma Supreme Courtroom. He additionally stated the video was grainy.

Shields truly noticed the jury for greater than two hours, in response to the state supreme court docket. Shields “misrepresented and was deceitful relating to the rationale he entered the safety room, the size of time he watched the jury, and what he noticed,” the state supreme court docket concluded.

Shields “not solely noticed the jury for over two hours, he did not disclose that he was doing so to the court docket, or opposing counsel, even when coping with jury questions. That is egregious habits,” the Oklahoma Supreme Courtroom stated.

Shields and the opposite prosecutor self-reported the matter to the Oklahoma Bar Affiliation.

Shields agreed to resign and entered right into a deferred prosecution settlement by which he acknowledged violating a legislation that bans observing or recording jurors. He specified, nevertheless, that he had no intent to interrupt the legislation.

Shields argued that he acquired no benefit by observing the jury, and he had watched others—together with judges and prosecutors—hearken to juries when deliberations acquired loud.

The state supreme court docket cited a number of mitigating elements. They included Shields’ navy service, his acceptance of accountability for his actions, his self-reporting of the incident to the Oklahoma Bar Affiliation, and his cooperation within the investigation that adopted.

He has been “diligent in finishing the phrases” of the deferred prosecution settlement and has entered into an settlement with Legal professionals Serving to Legal professionals, a referral service for legal professionals, the Oklahoma Supreme Courtroom stated.

Shields’ lawyer, Sheila Naifeh, instructed the ABA Journal that she and her shopper don’t have any touch upon the suspension.

Write a letter to the editor, share a narrative tip or replace, or report an error.