Writer of Tyco letter assumed was mistrial

NEW YORK (AP) — The author of a letter that contributed to the mistrial in the Tyco case told police he thought a mistrial already had been declared when he wrote it, a police official told the Associated Press yesterday.

The signed letter expressed anger at juror Ruth Jordan for appearing to favor the acquittal of two executives charged with looting Tyco International.

The juror also received a phone call, perceived as intimidating, that police believe was from someone other than the letter writer.

The communications prompt-ed Justice Michael Obus to declare a mistrial Friday in the six-month case after 11 days of deliberations, citing outside influences on the jury.

The signed letter was sent last week to Ms. Jordan, 79, who had been identified during the trial by some news organizations.

The letter “was signed by a person who thought there was already a mistrial and was complaining to her about it,” said the police official, who spoke to AP on the condition of anonymity.

The official, who had not seen the letter but had been briefed on the investigation, said the letter was not threatening.

“It wasn’t a death threat,” the police official said. “It probably doesn’t rise to the level where there would be a prosecution, but that’s the DA’s call.” Among the potential charges could be jury tampering.

The letter writer’s explanation was first reported yesterday by the Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post.

The letter is under court seal. On Monday, news organizations asked the Tyco judge to release sealed transcripts and other materials from the proceedings that led to the mistrial.

Another police official, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity, confirmed to AP yesterday that the letter was mailed from Massachusetts and that officers had gone there to talk to the writer.

There was no immediate response from Ms. Jordan. She has refused to comment except to say media portrayals of her have been unfair.

During the trial, notes from the jury declared that deliberations had become “poisonous” and suggested that one juror, later identified as Ms. Jordan, was unwilling to deliberate.

According to jurors’ accounts, she later became more cooperative and jurors were on the verge of a verdict when the mistrial was declared.