`MARIJUANA-ADDICT' JUROR EXCUSED FROM TRIAL

One man is excused after two members of the jury admit prior knowledge
of a witness in a murder case.

A juror at a three-month murder trial was discharged from duty Monday
after he told a B.C. Supreme Court judge he was a marijuana addict
experiencing withdrawal symptoms since he had been sequestered in jury
deliberations for four days.

The man, identified only as Juror 1209, said in spite of his symptoms
- -- irritability and shakiness of his hands -- he felt he could
continue as a juror.

The jury began to consider its verdict last Friday concerning the fate
of three accused: Steven Kyllo, Serge Taupin and Wayne Lubkey.

Kyllo, 28, is accused of robbery and first-degree murder in the death
of Lion's Lair Arcade worker Edward Chownick, 39, who was beaten to
death Dec. 5, 1994. Taupin, 34, and Lubkey, 37, are accused of robbing
Chownick of about $6,000 in coins and bills.

Juror 1209, who bore a striking resemblance to the Neuman character
from the television show Seinfeld, was first brought into the court
Monday morning to be questioned by Justice Elizabeth Bennett after the
head juror sent a note to the judge.

The note said two jurors had admitted to having knowledge about ``Fag
Bob,'' a witness at the trial who testified he was a marijuana dealer.

One juror told the judge he had helped someone move years ago and the
person had supplied beer, pizza and marijuana. The marijuana had been
obtained by ``Fag Bob,'' recalled the balding man, who said he felt he
could continue doing his duty as a juror.

The other juror, 1209, told jurors he had done a variety of drugs and
that he knew of Fag Bob. He told the judge he only had peripheral
knowledge of the witness and felt he could continue to perform his
duty.

The judge decided not to dismiss either juror. The jury then continued
its verdict deliberations. Minutes later, the court was informed the
jury wanted to send another note.

This note said some jurors were fearful for their safety, knowing
Juror 1209 was an admitted drug addict who was suffering withdrawal
symptoms.

The note also said juror 1209 told his fellow jurors that he had
smoked a joint while washing dishes at home during the trial and had
an epiphany, realizing one of the witnesses was psychotic.

Juror 1209 told his fellow jurors that he had with him the DSM-3 --
the diagnostic manual used by psychiatrists to assess mental illness
and personality disorders, the note stated.

Juror 1209 was brought back into court a second time and questioned by
the judge about bringing the book into the jury room. He explained he
had brought it to read and that he hadn't shown it to other jurors to
support his opinion.

The defence lawyers opposed the judge dismissing the juror. But Crown
prosecutor Mike Luchenko argued the juror had violated his oath.
(Jurors are supposed to decide a verdict based solely on the evidence
heard in court.)

After relieving him of his duty, the judge thanked juror 1209 for his
time devoted to the trial.

The juror said he had enjoyed the judge's company, then left the
court.

The deliberations then continued with 11 jurors.

Last year, another Vancouver murder trial encountered a similarly
bizarre situation when a jury sent a note saying one juror did not
believe the murder victim was really dead and that the juror wanted to
see death certificate.

The judge reminded the jury the victim was deceased, noting a
pathologist had testified about performing the autopsy on the woman,
who had been shot by her step-son after he heard voices telling him
``just do it.''

The jury in that case found the man, a former B.C. Lions football
player, was not guilty due to a mental disorder. The man had also shot
his father, who survived.

In Quebec, at the start of a murder trial last November, the judge
exempted from service more than half the 250 jury candidates.

A small-party candidate in that month's provincial election was among
excused. To the candidate's observation that ``It would be terribly
difficult to run in an election if one was sequestered in a trial and
couldn't be campaigning,'' the judge retorted that perhaps that would
be the best way to get elected. Then he exempted the candidate.

A woman who asked to be excused on the grounds that she had to care
for her pets was not excused.