Jury Duty

[jamespowers]

After years of being either my jury number not being called or dismissed form the jury pool, I just have the owner of the company right me a note. I actually wanted to serve but I just got tired of the run around and the defense always sensing that I wanted to can their client from the start---even when I didn't necessarily.
As an aside, one time when my father was serving jury duty he noticed that a former employee of his was the baliff. After all the names were called and a pile of missing jurors names were left over, my father asked what happened to the people who didn't show up. The baliff showed him. They ended up in the round file. [huh]

Regards,

J

P.S. Perhaps being a member FIJA might turn them off as well. [huh]

 

[Feraud]

I was very proud to serve when last called. My case was a personal injury one. We learned a lot about the type of injury in question. In this case we learned the plaintiff was taking advantage of a prior condition to sue the defendant. The case was about to be given to the jury when the plaintiff suddenly (on the good advice of her lawyer) decided to settle with the defendant.
In my opinion the system works well. I look forward to my next experience and hope it is as positive as this one.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

I cannot stress enough...

http://www.fija.org/

...for every citizen of the United States of America to access this website and to become familiar with the Fully Informed Jury Association and with the concept of Jury Nullification.

"The jury has the right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy" -John Jay, 1st Chief Justice 1789 U.S. Surpreme Court

-dixon cannon

 

[Pilgrim]

I've been called a number of times but never asked to serve. Once I asked to be excused because I was hosting a national satellite teleconference on the day of the jury selection. I was the producer, the videographer, the video editor, the script writer, and the program host (among other roles). I had a good case for showing that without my presence, the entire teleconference would have to be canceled.

 

[Willi_Goat]

I was called for Federal jury duty one year. The judge asked if there were any police officers or firefighters in the room and proceded to dismiss those where answered yes. There was one man who said he was a firefighter on his way out say, "That's good, I'm not the kind of person you want on a jury anyway." The judge invited him to sit back down and wait through the selection process. Neither of us were selected for the jury, a lawsuit from what I remember, but the firefighter had to sit through two or three more hours of the selection process. Maybe he learned to keep his mouth shut at those times.

 

[Tony in Tarzana]

Funny thing is, I'm 45, I was born in the United States, had a driver's license since the age of 15 and have been registered to vote continuously since I was 18, and this is only the second jury duty notice I've ever gotten, and the first time I've had to show up.

My biggest fear, really, was my fellow jurors. What if I had to deliberate with a room full of idiots?

 

[jamespowers]

My biggest fear, really, was my fellow jurors. What if I had to deliberate with a room full of idiots?

You probably would have. Most jurors nowadays, present company excluded , are people who could not figure a way out of jury duty.

Regards,

J

 

[Feraud]

My biggest fear, really, was my fellow jurors. What if I had to deliberate with a room full of idiots?

All you need is one idiot to sidetrack justice. My wife served on a jury where one woman was adamant over a defendant's innocence. She gave very flimsy opinions and chose to believe the police had arrested the wrong person. No amount of proof could convince her otherwise. I hear it was quite a contentious discussion in the jury room that day. I believe the case was declared a mistrial.
The important thing is to do your part.

 

[scotrace]

All you need is one idiot to sidetrack justice. My wife served on a jury where one woman was adamant over a defendant's innocence. She gave very flimsy opinions and chose to believe the police had arrested the wrong person. No amount of proof could convince her otherwise.

This is very true, but I'd hate to use the term "idiot." The thing that takes some jurors by surprise is that when it comes right down to it, when they are called upon to make a decision -and judge another person's actions - they just cannot do it. It can be much harder than you think and the emotional reactions people have can be surprisingly strong - even to themselves.
I remember one very intelligent, lovely woman breaking down in tears, saying "who are we to judge what happened?"
At the other end of the scale - and probably worse - is a juror who just wants to get the process done so they can get to their kid's soccer game. They don't participate in deliberations, and will vote however the group does, changing as needed, to get out of there.
One is taking it too personally, the other too lightly.

 

[Feraud]

This is very true, but I'd hate to use the term "idiot." The thing that takes some jurors by surprise is that when it comes right down to it, when they are called upon to make a decision -and judge another person's actions - they just cannot do it. It can be much harder than you think and the emotional reactions people have can be surprisingly strong - even to themselves.
I remember one very intelligent, lovely woman breaking down in tears, saying "who are we to judge what happened?"
At the other end of the scale - and probably worse - is a juror who just wants to get the process done so they can get to their kid's soccer game. They don't participate in deliberations, and will vote however the group does, changing as needed, to get out of there.
One is taking it too personally, the other too lightly.

You are absolutly right. Thanks for pointing that out. Idiot should not be used in a general sense and is not a person who opposes a general consensus. I was thinking of my wife's case and one specific person. That woman caused the rest of the jury a lot of heartache due to circumstances better left untyped.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Frankly, that 's the way it's supposed to work!

All you need is one idiot to sidetrack justice. My wife served on a jury where one woman was adamant over a defendant's innocence. She gave very flimsy opinions and chose to believe the police had arrested the wrong person. No amount of proof could convince her otherwise. I hear it was quite a contentious discussion in the jury room that day. I believe the case was declared a mistrial.
The important thing is to do your part.

If the jury is unable to come to a UNANIMOUS decision, than that is mistrial. It does require a guilty verdict by all jurers in order to convict - that's the jury process.

Here in Arizona, in a particularly important case, a similar jurer was removed by the presiding judge, replaced by an alternate and the defendant was promptly found guility. That is blatant jury tampering!!!!.... and the reason each and every one of us need to be FULLY informed jurors.

-dixon cannon

 

[Doh!]

I was called a couple of years ago, and the judge asked us if there was any reason for not being able to serve. One potential juror said that he was an architect and had several upcoming meetings that he couldn't get out of without losing the client (yeah, right). The judge asked him, "Architect? Are you familiar with the work of Art Vandelay?" The guy ponders this a second and responds, "Yeah, I think I've heard of him."

I started to crack up -- and was the only one to do so. The judge then said, "Ah... it's good to know at least one person watches Seinfeld!" (For those unfamiliar, "Art Vandeley" was the phony architect name that George Costanza used on more than one occassion.)

Soon after this exchange I was dismissed from duty by the prosecutor.

Hater.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Some jury info...

Almost every jury in the land is falsely instructed by the judge when it is told it must accept as the law that which is given to them by the court, and that the jury can decide only the facts of the case. This is to undermine the purpose of a common law jury, and to permit the imposition of tyranny at the first and most basic level.

The jury's options are by no means limited to the choices presented to it in the courtroom. The jury gets its understanding as to the arrangements in the legal system from more than one voice. There is the formal communication from the judge. There is the informal communication from the total culture, which includes of course, history and tradition.

Any juror can, with impunity, choose to disregard the instructions of any judge or attorney in rendering his vote in the jury room. If only one juror should vote "Not Guilty" for any reason, there is no conviction and no punishment at the end of the trial. Thus those acting in the name of government must come before the common man (the people) to get permission to enforce a law.

Excellent article on the subject: http://www.jurorsrule.com/Minneapolis_Star_Article.html

-dixon cannon

 

[raiderrescuer]

CSI Jury...

We are hearing about cases where the Jury is chastising Prosecutors because they did not do a test or follow the exact steps as seen on a previous episode of CSI...some people watch way too much T.V. and allowing the guilty party to walk away scott-free based on the CSI technicality.

 

[Legal Concepts]

Jury duty is FUN, you get paid, and free donuts!

 

[jamespowers]

Jury duty is FUN, you get paid, and free donuts!

Thank you Homer Simpson.

Regards,

J

 

[Twitch]

In Southern California they've had the most dreadful system until about a years ago. You had to just sit for days on end to see if you'd be called and then if you were you'd have to get tied up for perhaps several more days in a case. It was tedious mind numbing boredom. I've never served on anything. They changed it now so you can basically phone it in and they contact you if they wish to interview you. Unfortunately now my bladder is not in the type of health that I could sit for hours listening to wanna-be Perry Masons. I believe I'll get a doctor's note and give of on civic duty.[huh]

 

[Archie Goodwin]

I've been called up twice, once in Orleans Parish and once in Florida. Both times I was asked my educational level, and then was promptly dismissed as a potential juror. I have a bachelor's and two masters degrees, and have been told by people who have no reason to know that lawyers don't want educated jurors. Perhaps one of the members of the bar here in the lounge can legitimize or debunk this rumor.