BY DAN HORN\nThe Cincinnati Enquirer\nTwo decades after his first obscenity trial in Hamilton County, Larry Flynt finally got a chance Tuesday to hear what a new generation of jurors thinks of him.
For most of the day, it sounded just like old times.
At least a dozen prospective jurors voiced strong opinions against pornography and, in some cases, against the Hustler publisher himself. One said he believes pornography is a sin. One had friends who talked openly about wanting to "fry" Mr. Flynt. And another said he moved his family to Cincinnati because authorities ran the publisher out of town 22 years ago.
"I think pornography is morally wrong," said a middle-aged man who sits on the board of a Christian school.
To Mr. Flynt, who is charged with 15 obscenity-related offenses, the comments were not necessarily bad news. He said the frank discussions during jury selection were far more enlightening than any his attorneys had with jurors during his first obscenity trial here in 1977.
In that case, he said, jurors "lied through their teeth" about their personal beliefs because they wanted to get on the jury. "In this courtroom, we're having a different experience," Mr. Flynt said Tuesday after the second day of jury selection in common pleas court. "I think it's very encouraging."
Because the jurors spoke so openly about their opinions, he said, it has been easier for his attorneys to recognize the ones they should try to remove later in the selection process. Several of those jurors were dismissed from service Tuesday when they told Judge Patrick Dinkelacker they could not set aside their personal beliefs and be fair to Mr. Flynt or his brother Jimmy, who faces the same charges.
But a few others, including the Christian school board member, remained in the jury pool because they assured the judge their feelings would not prevent them from following the law. The Flynts' attorneys, as well as prosecutors, will be able to throw out up to eight jurors apiece later this week.
Both sides agree jury selection is crucial to the case because Ohio's obscenity law requires jurors to use so much of their own judgment in determining what is obscene.
In this case, the jurors will view 16 sexually explicit videos to decide whether they violate community standards for obscenity. The movies - a total of 30 to 40 hours long - were sold at the Flynts' Hustler store downtown. Mr. Flynt has repeatedly said he returned to Cincinnati in hopes of getting another trial on obscenity charges. He said times have changed since 1977 because people are now more tolerant of adult material.
The first trial ended in a conviction, which was later thrown out on appeal, and solidified Cincinnati's reputation as a conservative community.
After jury selection Tuesday, Mr. Flynt admitted many of the jurors' opinions were as strong as any he heard 22 years ago. But he said everyone seemed more open about acknowledging their personal bias and, in some cases, willing to consider the opinions of those who do not share their views.
"I feel much better about it now," Mr. Flynt said.
All of the jurors said they had never been inside the Hustler store and all said they had never seen the 16 videos in question. Defense attorneys grilled jurors at length Tuesday because most of those who were questioned individually had expressed some concern about the content of the videotapes.
The jurors were asked whether they had ever seen explicit material - only a few answered yes - and were questioned about their tolerance for films that depicted graphic sex between men, women and groups of both. When the day was over, 35 of the original 65 jurors remained in the pool. Jury selection resumes today but could be concluded by Thursday or Friday.
"I think we're making good progress," said assistant county prosecutor Steve Tolbert. "Most of the jurors indicated they could be fair to both sides, and that's all we're asking for.
