Jury Duty Anyone

[sheeplady]

I've been called once and was selected for the jury. Civil case to do with prison guard brutality.

Both based upon my experience in that case with the content as well as my experience with serving- I could never serve on a case that involved a massive amount of jail time or the death penalty. I know my limits as an individual, and in those cases I couldn't suspend what I know and believe in order to follow the letter of the law. I also believe strongly in jury nullification and disagree with several of the laws in my state and country. I could not pass judgement on a person in those circumstances, even if I believed they were guilty of an unjust law. If asked these questions about a case, I would answer honestly. It's not fair to the government, other citizens, and the person on trial not to know my true feelings. There are several circumstances (DWI with death, child abuse, etc.) that I have had personal experience with and know that I could not trust placing my feelings aside and do what is best for the people involved.

I am really glad that I have had that experience, and I would definitely serve again if asked, was qualified, and felt it was something I could be open about and not have strong beliefs about that would cloud my judgement (which is up to the court to decide).

 

[Atticus Finch]

...I know my limits as an individual, and in those cases I couldn't suspend what I know and believe in order to follow the letter of the law. I also believe strongly in jury nullification and disagree with several of the laws in my state and country. I could not pass judgement on a person in those circumstances, even if I believed they were guilty of an unjust law.

There is nothing wrong with this. Most states require jurors to take an oath that they will follow the laws of their state and of the United States. If a person feels that a certain law is unjust, and it would be difficult for them to apply such a law in the pending case, then the person should be honest with the court and say so. The juror would normally be excused from that particular case...but perhaps not the next case or the one thereafter.

Most defense lawyers and prosecutors try to predict the outcomes of cases based on the existing law and the facts of the case. Because of this, lawyers on both sides generally want jurors who will follow the law. When jurors don’t follow the law…or worse yet, make up their own law…predicting the outcomes of cases becomes quite the crapshoot.

AF

 

[m0nk]

Personally, I wouldn't mind being called up for Jury Duty as my company still pays for the time less what the courts pay you (as most do). I was sent a summons once, but at the time it was impossible for me to serve because of an inability to keep child care up, so they let me pass. All I had to do was write a letter with the information stating why and they responded quickly saying I was excused.

But at any rate, it's entertainment you can't pay for, and in the end you can see how the system works. The more you know, the better prepared you are should you ever need the system. Remember, laws can be on your side, too...

 

[sheeplady]

There is nothing wrong with this. Most states require jurors to take an oath that they will follow the laws of their state and of the United States. If a person feels that a certain law is unjust, and it would be difficult for them to apply such a law in the pending case, then the person should be honest with the court and say so. The juror would normally be excused from that particular case...but perhaps not the next case or the one thereafter.

Most defense lawyers and prosecutors try to predict the outcome of cases based on the existing law and the facts of the case. Because of this, lawyers on both sides generally want jurors who will follow the law. When jurors don’t follow the law…or worse yet, make up new law…predicting the outcomes of cases become quite the crapshoot.

AF

Yeah, the last jury I served on the judge was good about asking those types of questions and explained to us our duty as jurors really well. (I had no qualms about that trial, but some people did and were dismissed.) If at another trial the judge didn't ask those questions, I'd raise my hand and politely explain my position. It's not fair to the people on trial to not know the jury they are getting.

I've always believed strongly in jury duty as one of my responsibilities. Years ago (before I served) I never would have thought about any of this. But after serving I realized that there are some circumstances I cannot make a fair judgement at, and I thought long and hard about what those would be.

I have to say, most people at the trial I was at took their jury duty as a joke. Myself and two other jurors felt one way in the case, the rest felt the other, and we were at a stalemate. I offered a compromise heavily weighted towards my (and the other two who felt similarly) view of the case, and the rest of the jury jumped at it "just to get out of there." I ended up arguing their viewpoint and one of the other jurors told me to shut up so they could all go home, which was the atmosphere at the time. I felt that justice served my side of the case; however, if I felt as strongly as some of the other jurors felt I would have pushed back against the compromise.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

When I volunteered during jury questioning,that I would not/could not sit as a juror on a death penalty trial(which might be the one at hand)...the prosecuting attorney confronted me to argue the point that the court issued the penalty..not you...so I must explain myself further. He wouldn't let it go..until the Judge stepped in and finally excused me. If he hadn't..I fear I would still be in the box (fifteen years later) still arguing the point with the jerk!
HD

 

[Atticus Finch]

When I volunteered during jury questioning,that I would not/could not sit as a juror on a death penalty trial(which might be the one at hand)...the prosecuting attorney confronted me to argue the point that the court issued the penalty..not you...so I must explain myself further. He wouldn't let it go..until the Judge stepped in and finally excused me. If he hadn't..I fear I would still be in the box (fifteen years later) still arguing the point with the jerk!
HD

HD, my guess is that he wrote you off five minutes into the conversation, but he was still using you to "educate" the other jurors about the system.

Anyhow, your story reminds me of a morbid joke....

Prosecutor: Mr. Smith, if the jury votes to convict this defendant, we will then move on to the second phase of the trial…the penalty phase. If the state presents evidence that establishes aggravating factors that substantially outweigh any factors of mitigation, could you vote to impose the death penalty?

Mr. Smith: They still execute prisoners up in Raleigh, don’t they?

Prosecutor (puzzled): Yes…in Raleigh at Central Prison.

Mr. Smith: Yeah, I guess I could take a half day off from work and go do that.

AF

 

[HoosierDaddy]

AF
Yeah..was my guess too at the time. I just kinda resented the fact that I was being put in the spotlight that just wouldn't turn off.
I might have taken a half day off at the time to go and do that as well..if it was that prosecutor to be hooked up to the hot seat..!!
HD

 

[Big Man]

...

Mr. Smith: They still execute prisoners up in Raleigh, don’t they?

Prosecutor (puzzled): Yes…in Raleigh at Central Prison.

...

I thought all they did in Raleigh was "execute" the law.[huh]

 

[BigFitz]

I was called and served once about 25 years ago. I thought the experience was worth the time.

 

[Dan Allen]

I was called for jury duty for 5 out of 6 court sessions. On the fifth appearance the judge recognized me and told me to go home and my name would be pulled from the pool. On the way out the courtroom he added that with my luck and the size of the pool my name was being drawn from he wanted to know whenever I was going to Vegas, he wanted to go along. That was thirty five years ago and I haven't heard from the county courthouse again. All in all though, the four sessions I was involved in were a good experience and and I advise anyone called to go-if for no other reason than the education.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

At one time prospective jurors were picked from among registered voters, now they're drawn from the DMV because many people don't vote in order to avoid jury duty.

 

[Doublegun]

It is a privilege and a responsibility to serve on a jury. The right to a jury of ones peers is one thing that makes this country great. Go, serve, listen and learn and understand this is your duty as a citizen of the US.

 

[Widebrim]

^^Agree with the above. I'm scheduled for Dec. 17, in downtown L.A.

 

[Atticus Finch]

It is my firm belief that one has no right to complain about the decisions made by his government unless he has voted in the most recent election, if he was eligible to do so.

And...one has no right to complain about the workings of law enforcement or the judicial system unless he has offered his service as a juror when asked to do so.

AF

 

[Edward]

I was exempted for years (two law degrees, published author, full-time academic in the field). The theory was that the perception I (or anyone else in my position) am "an expert in law" could bias a jury towards one person's opinion. The rule was relaxed some years ago, no doubt in response to the many people who would shirk their civic duty in this regard, but I have still not been fortunate enough to be called, sadly.

 

[Edward]

It is my firm belief that one has no right to complain about the decisions made by his government unless he has voted in the most recent election, if he was eligible to do so.

And...one has no right to complain about the workings of law enforcement or the judicial system unless he has offered his service as a juror when asked to do so.

AF

Agreed entirely.

 

[Feraud]

What I also found interesting about the cases I participated in were the jurors.
Our jury was made up a cross section of citizens. All walks of life were represented and worked together to do what was asked of us.
I left the courhouse impressed with the system.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

What I also found interesting about the cases I participated in were the jurors.
Our jury was made up a cross section of citizens. All walks of life were represented and worked together to do what was asked of us.
I left the courhouse impressed with the system.

...as did I.
Finally jurors left in a room with only instructions about using the proven facts to form a decision. After battling doubts and emotions concerning a serious issue..that was exactly the outcome.
HD

 

[sheeplady]

Perhaps it was the quality of the people or even the "lack" of seriousness in the case I served on (civil case- no jail time- just money), but unfortunately I didn't walk away feeling better about the justice system. It actually made me feel worse. I had really high expectations for jury duty too- it's something I've looked forward to doing since I was a kid.

 

[ButteMT61]

What I also found interesting about the cases I participated in were the jurors. Our jury was made up a cross section of citizens. All walks of life were represented and worked together to do what was asked of us. I left the courhouse impressed with the system.

Me as well. People think that when a verdict is reached that the jury must have been "stupid, tainted, etc" but in the times I've been involved, it's been very trying for all involved to do the right thing. Now I'm sure that when the stakes are really high in a murder or high profile case, there are many more variables or influences that might creep into the process. My cases were a 0.01 on the crimes Richter scale.