Gray contended that when he was handcuffed and brought in for questioning on August 1, 1994, he was arrested without probable cause and that the statements he made while in police custody were the direct product of that illegal arrest. Accordingly, he argued that the district court erred in not suppressing the statements he made on August 1, after receiving Miranda warnings and in admitting them at trial. Gray also argued that the statements he gave on August 1 were not voluntary and should be suppressed on that ground. This review of the case cites the facts to support Gray's arrest based on probable cause; these include the recovery from Gray of a handgun that had earlier been used in a crime, information from wiretaps that Gray was involved in the murder at issue, and corroborative information that one of the victims was able to identify Gray from a photo array as resembling his assailant. The court concluded that Gray's detention was supported by probable cause and was therefore legal, such that any statements made voluntarily after having been given Miranda warnings were admissible at trial. The court found no indication of coercion in the statements Gray made to law enforcement officers while he was in custody. The discussion of jury security and facility management addresses jury orientation, jury viewing of a site, bailiff responsibilities during jury deliberations, the management of women jurors, juror illness, emergency jury evacuation, and the characteristics of the jury room.