The trial can't start until there is a jury. Jury selection for the Schmid trial proved to be a difficult undertaking.
Selection began Feb. 15, 1966. The knowledge that the jurors would be sequestered during the trial made selection a little more difficult since it created a hardship for many prospective jurors.
From the Arizona Daily Star, Feb. 16, 1966:
Spectators Scramble For Seats
Jury To Be Locked Up While Schmid On Trial
12 Of Panel Picked; 20 More Due Today
Legal maneuvering reigned yesterday as a panel of 12 prospective jurors was selected to hear the trial of Charles H. Schmid Jr., 23, charged with the killing of teenaged Gretchen and Wendy Fritz.
As spectators scrambled for almost nonexistent seats and for a look at the nattily attired defendant, there was these developments:
Judge Lee Garrett honored a request to lock the jury up at night while the trial is going on. This is believed to be the first time in recent Tucson legal history that a jury has been sequestered.
—Strategy for the prosecution and defense — at least for the first part of the trial — was unveiled in the questions asked of the prospective jurors.
—The appearance of a mystery witness in the trial — Paul T. Ginn, a former roommate of Schmid — was noted. He was flown back to Tucson Monday night from New Orleans.
—It was announced that 20 more prospective jurors will be selected from the 98-member panel today. From this number 12 jurors and two alternates will be selected. The trial is expected to last two, possibly three, weeks.
One of the attorneys, prosecutor William Schafer III, or William Tinney, representing Schmid, requested that the jurors be sequestered. Judge Garrett said he was obliged to honor this request. He said he would not identify which attorney made the request in chambers yesterday morning.
Ten prospective jurors were excused when they said it would work a hardship on their family responsibilities to be locked up for up to three weeks with only emergency contact with the outside world.
Judge Garrett said he has made arrangements for hotel rooms for the final jury panel.
Two persons were excused because they could not vote to inflict the death penalty if they should find Schmid guilty of slaying Gretchen and Wendy Fritz last Aug. 16.
Both attorneys questioned the prospective jurors about pretrial publicity.
Questions asked by the attorneys included: Have you formed an opinion about the case? Would the publicity influence your verdict? Have you talked about the case with friends? Have you seen accounts of the alleged crimes in the local press?
Do you promise that the issues in the case will be decided by you only on the basis of evidence presented in court and not on what you might have heard, read or seen before the trial?
The courtroom was jammed yesterday with 95 persons who had been summoned to appear as prospective jurors, a half dozen reporters plus court officials and the defendant.
After 12 final jurors are selected, two alternates must also be chosen who would take the place of a juror who for any reason is unable to continue as a juror.
Schmid, a former high school gymnastics champion, appeared calm although his usually dark complexion appeared unusually pale. He was dressed in light trousers, a dark sports coat and white shirt and tie. His hair had recently been cut. The short, stocky defendant was escorted to and from the courtroom by two deputy sheriffs.
The bodies of the Fritz sisters, 17 and 13, were found in the desert northeast of Tucson last November. Schmid was arrested and charged with murdering the girls the same day.
The notoriety attending the crime has brought a number of out-of-state reporters to the trial.
One of the first developments in the unfolding case was the muzzling of the law enforcement agencies from talking to the press about the case.
Officers — police, sheriff's deputies and the county attorney — were enjoined by court order asked by Schmid's attorney. The reason given was that Schmid would not be able to obtain fair trial if publication of stories about the case were printed.
At this time it is not known how the girls were killed nor has any motive for the case been given.
During the justice court hearing which ended with Schmid being bound over for trial, the press was barred from hearing the evidence.
When the mystery Ginn appeared at the courthouse yesterday, he refused to discuss what part he might play on trial. He was subpoenaed by the prosecution.
The next day it was reported that the final jurors were still not selected. From the Star, Feb. 17, 1966:
Schmid Jury Remains Unfilled
2 Mistrial Motions Denied By Judge
By Pete Cowgill
The Charles Schmid Jr. murder trial moved through its second day yesterday without a final jury panel being picked.
Prospective jurors fidgeted in the stuffy courtroom late yesterday afternoon as a rash of persons were excused from jury duty because they could not invoke the death penalty, they could not be locked up for two or three weeks or they said they had opinions about the guilt or innocence of Schmid.
Superior Court Judge Lee Garrett had earlier expressed hope that the 32 panel jurors could have been selected by 5 p.m. so that Prosecutor William Schafer and defense attorney William Tinney could pick the 12 final jurors the first thing this morning.
Only 29 panel members were chosen Tuesday and yesterday. Three more will be selected this morning. The attorneys will then pick the jury and it will be sworn. Another panel of six jurors will be selected from which two alternate jurors will be chosen by the attorneys.
Schafer is expected to make his opening statement to the jury later in the morning. Tinney may reserve making his opening statement until the state has rested its case.
Tinney made two motions for a mistrial outside of the presence of all prospective jurors. Both were denied by Garrett.
In one instance one of the prospective jurors told Tinney under questioning that he has two daughters — "One's name is Wendy." Tinney objected to the response and Garrett excused the man.
Tinney later moved for a mistrial because this prospective juror was "hostile" and his answers to questions "prejudiced Charles Schmid."
Tinney also asked for a mistrial after lunch because he claimed a page 1 picture in the Tucson Daily Citizen prejudiced this client. The picture showed Schmid sitting with his head bowed at the defense table in the courtroom.
Garrett also denied a motion by Tinney that photographers be barred from the courtroom at all times. Garrett has allowed photographs to be taken in the courtroom when he is not sitting on the bench.
When the jurors were finally selected, their living conditions were outlined by the Star on Feb. 18, 1966:
No Outside Contacts
Bailiffs 'Nurse' Schmid Case Jurors
By Pete Cowgill
The 14 jurors who will decide whether Charles Schmid Jr. is guilty or innocent of murdering Gretchen and Wendy Fritz are living the "Life of Riley."
They have five rooms in the Pioneer Hotel all paid for by Pima County taxpayers. All of their meals are also free. And to top it off they each get paid $8 per day.
Of course, there are minor inconveniences. They can't talk to anybody but two Superior Court bailiffs and themselves. They can't go anywhere by themselves unless a bailiff goes along (except to take a shower or brush their teeth).
They can watch TV to see how Hoss Cartwright or Richard Kimble are doing. But they can't see Walter Cronkite or David Brinkley to find out what is going on nationally and more particularly on the local scene.
Newspapers can be browsed through but all references to the Schmid trial or any other stories (including this one) will be deleted.
The jurors can indulge in such interesting activities as window shopping in the downtown area, going to the Sunday Evening Forum, playing pinochle. They can sleep late and not worry about getting the kids off to school. They don't have to play baby sitter for their grandchildren. They are as free as birds (in a gilded cage).
The five male jurors plus bailiff Joe Temple sleep in two rooms with two baths and a connecting door.
The nine female jurors occupy three other rooms with bailiff Mrs. Alberta Nevius. These three rooms with three baths interconnect.
"We want them to be comfortable and happy," Temple said. "They are supplied with everything they need."
Many of the jurors wash their socks and undergarments at night. They get 24-hour valet service (at their own expense) for shirts, skirts and dry cleaning.
Other personal items like shampoo, razor blades, shoe shining and other expenses are borne by the jurors.
None of the jurors can speak to their husbands or wives or other relatives or friends. Messages can be sent and received only through the bailiffs.
A total of 95 prospective jurors reported for selection on Feb. 15. After three days the 12 regular and two alternates were chosen. Each of the jurors whether selected or not who reported will be paid $8 per day. In the first three days this amounted to about $2,150.
The jurors will also be paid 15 cents per mile for a one-way trip from their house to the Courthouse. This is estimated at $240 for the first three days.
After the final jury was chosen all meals were paid for by the county (including those for the two bailiffs). This costs about $115 per day.
The hotel refused to say yesterday how much they are charging the county for the five rooms.
Could this blog's readers be impartial in such a case? Would they want to be sequestered?
These days the members of a sequestered jury would probably have their cell phones, laptops and other electronic devices taken away for the duration of the trial.
The Morgue Lady would probably even be required to hand over her Kindle — a fate worse than death for this voracious reader. One may download and read newspapers on the device, making it contraband for a sequestered juror.
