Order of Dr. Kilopi
I'm happy to serve. In fact, I was just wondering that since I bought a house 3 years ago, isn't it about time they call me?
Well, it happened. One of the questions I got was this "Have you, your spouse, or your child ever sustained an injury which required medical attention?" I find the question very vague. Have I ever needed a bandaid? gone to the emergency room?
I bet this is a medical malpractice case.
Of course I answered "yes".
Administrator
I've only done jury duty once (I'm 53). I was on call for about a week, and in that time only had one trial, which didn't even last an entire day (possession of a stolen auto). I enjoyed it, and would love to do it again, as long as it wasn't some sort of trial that went on for months and months.
Senior Member
About 15 years ago...served on a jury. It was a rape trial, and we found the defendent guilty.
An interesting side note, the jury was flat out lied to by the defense attorney...it certainly didn't "help" his client to be "caught" in a lie.
...it also didn't help that all the evidence pointed to the guilt of the defendent.
Was called again, last month, but had it delayed until September because we were on vacation.
i'm looking forward to it.
Order of Kilopi
Been called several times: once in college (I was scheduled to start during finals -- I got deferred), once for a federal criminal case (gangs killing across state lines), and about four times for state juries.
My daughter got called for federal jury duty and was on the jury for a work-place related civil rights case.
Established Member
I was called last year for the first time, local jury (not state or federal). They called us in by randomly assigned numbers, but they filled all the required spots before they got to me. Too bad, I was looking forward to it.
Order of Kilopi
I would have to interpret the question to mean the services of outside medical professionals, not just your having to apply a band-aid.Originally Posted by crosscountry
Order of Kilopi
I was called four times while I was in the Air Force(16 years), couldn't make it as I wasn't in the area. Up until 2000, I believe, Florida used those who had a voting card. After that, they went to those who had a drivers license. I was called once since 2000. Just last year. Then got chosen for a case (DUI). Got a nice little certificate. Can't wait to do it again.
Moderator & Sausage Gawd
Since buying our house almost 8 years ago, I've been called pretty regularly every couple of years...and I have to put it off for 6 months every time. They like to call me at the end of the fiscal year...a busy time for a budget professional. But I haven't yet served on a jury. In fact, I've never even been called in for the selection interview. A couple of times I was even released before completing the questionnaire. The other couple of times, I suspect they didn't like one of my answers on that questionnaire so I wonder if I'll ever be called.
─────────────────────────────────────────────
My moderation comments will appear in this color.
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the lower-left corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►
Order of Kilopi
Called once. They asked me if I could be objective, and I honestly said no. They asked if I could put dismissed evidence or statements out of my mind, and I honestly said no.
They sent me home and I've never been called again. (Though the fact that I'm on disability for mental illness now might also be putting them off lately.)
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Established Member
Called three times, sat once. In Detroit, sat around all day and didn't get seated. In Southfield, sat around for a few hours and was sent home because all the cases were settled. In Oakland county, helped convict a small-potatoes pot dealer three years (!) after the arrest.
That one was odd. There were four charges: Selling pot (a felony), possession of a weapon while committing a felony (selling pot), possession of a firearm by a felon (also a felony, as he'd been busted & convicted before), and possession of a weapon while committing a felony (having a firearm and being a felon). The last two were incestuous enough that we had trouble believing it. We sank him on the pot-selling charge and let him off on the others because the prosecution couldn't show that he knew that the weapon was there.
If I get called again, I just might bring along a copy of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas if I can find one with a cover that's readable from a distance.
Fred
"For shame, gentlemen, pack your evidence a little better against another time."
-- John Dryden, "The Vindication of The Duke of Guise" 1684
Order of Kilopi
I was called three times, once on the Monday after getting married (deferred by phone), again the week my wife was due (deferred after a short time in the pool) and sat once for a civil trial.
It was a car accident case and the plaintiff made the worst "bluff roll failure" ever. He spoke of a motorcycle accident to his attorney and when the defendant's attorney asked him about that accident, he denied having it. The judge allowed the defendant's attorney to have the record read back to us and the man still denied having any motorcycle accident. The judge shrugged it off and told us that unless he specifically instructed us to ignore something, we could use it to make a judgement.
One other issue was a testifying doctor was displaying MIR slides.There was a pause in testimony for some reason and the doctor was talking to a clerk. The jury overheard the doctor say "I never noticed THAT before" while gesturing at a slide. We were all were horrified and started waving at the judge. That netted us a half day recess. It turns out that one of the doctor's names on the slide was the same last name as someone in the court. It was a total coincidence, but a poorly timed one.
Solfe
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'That was tops! Who's not good at math? I was all, "Four!"' - Finn, Adventure Time.
Order of Kilopi
I was on two juries about 20 years ago and have been called several times since but never had to serve again. Several times I had to beg off because my parents were ill. The last couple of times I called into the automated number as required (once a week for a month) but wasn't needed. I was exceedingly unimpressed by the attorneys and police in the two minor cases I was on.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.
Moderator
My son has been summoned for jury duty in Harris County, TX, about once every two years for the last ten years. Which was when he moved to Los Angeles. They have never taken him off the voter rolls.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov
Moderation will be in purple.
Rules for Posting to This Board
Established Member
That implies a very high rate of jury service calls you expect. In my family in Britain, only one of us has ever been called in an aggregate of over 150 eligible person years. Though it does depend upon how active your local courts are - we've always lived within the area only of county courts, whereas people living in central London can get called up more often; someone in the office has been called up twice.
I'm wondering if the high rate of call-ups is due to this jury vetting you have, ie, lots of people have to be screened but few end up serving.
Order of Kilopi
I've been called twice. The first time, it was in the middle of college exams... in another province. They excused me for that one. The second, I wound up jury foreman. Interesting experience, but hard to listen to for a variety of reasons. I'd be more specific if I could.
Newbie
Lived in your country a long time, was called twice, and both times escaped by moving to a different state.
Sounds like a defence based on the truth wouldn't have done real well then
Established Member
Are you sure the lawyer was demonstrably committing an untruth? Being lawyers, they would on the whole strenuously avoid making demonstrably false statements in court, as that would put their livelihood at risk. Or was it "My client maintains that....", which, from the mouth of the lawyer, is a perfectly true statement, no matter how absurd whatever it was that the client maintained.
Established Member
I was called twice. First time I was sent home after a few hours because I wasn't needed. Second time I was on a two day trial of a drug dealer. It was a relatively open-and-shut case, which left all of us jurors wondering why he even bothered to plead not guilty. After the trial was over ( and he was convicted on all counts) the judge explained what we were not allowed to know beforehand that he had two prior felony convictions. This third one put him over the limit and set him up for a long prison sentence under a "three strikes" law, which is why he refused a plea bargain deal. Apparently he was hoping that there would be one sympathetic juror who refused to convict. It wasn't what I would call an enjoyable experience, but it is an important duty that we all took seriously.
Also,
Welcome to BAUT Punch. I'm curious about how you phrased your comment "Lived in your country a long time". Are you a US citizen? If not then you are not allowed to serve on a US jury, so there was no need to "escape" by moving to another state.
Senior Member
Absolutely no doubt.
Without going into grizzly details...
In his closing arguments, he attempted to rebute prosecution witness testimony by telling us that we were not seeing what evidence indicated we were seeing.
....and it was VERY OBVIOUS that the prosecution had it right...
I guess he thought there was nothing to lose by lying.
...also interesting and something we did not know until after the trial was over...this was the defendents 2nd trial, the 1st ending in a hung jury.
...and I really don't think the defendent considered that he would go to jail, because when the verdict was announced, his eyes got very wide.
Order of Kilopi
I wasn't registered to vote until the last election, so I've been in the pool for a very short while. I'd be happy (well, unhappy but willing) to serve if called, though I'm not sure any defense lawyer would want someone with my personal biases. And I mean from a law/enforcement standpoint, not racial, gender, or religious bias.
Do you get in trouble for showing up for selection wearing a "Hang 'em all and let god sort 'em out!" Tee?
Senior Member
On a related note...how hard is it really to get out of jury duty if you want to?
The questions usually are leading you to what they "want" from you...and you just answer un-accordingly.
Order of Kilopi
Your best bet is to have general reason not to serve and be excused before any interview process.On a related note...how hard is it really to get out of jury duty if you want to?
The questions usually are leading you to what they "want" from you...and you just answer un-accordingly.
When I was interviewed, one lawyer asked me "Is it ok to lie?" I answered yes.
The woman after me answered these questions:
Q: "Have ever been involved in a liability case?" A: "Yes."
Q: "How long ago?" A: "6 months ago."
Q: "What was the case regarding?" A: "A faulty heater installed in my parents house caught fire and my mother, father, 2 sisters and brother were all killed. I was the only survivor."
Q: "Were you injured?" A: "Yes..."
She was on the jury over the objections of both lawyers.
Solfe
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'That was tops! Who's not good at math? I was all, "Four!"' - Finn, Adventure Time.
Senior Member
Last time I was called...must be around 5 years ago, I was briefly interviewed...don't even recall the questions asked, and was immediately released from service.
Don't have a clue as to why...maybe it was the beard.
Order of Kilopi
I'm 60 and have never been called. I'd make a great juror since I'm aware that jurors can vote according to their conscience and overturn laws, and I'd make sure my fellow jurors knew it too.
Order of Kilopi
Judges tend to strongly discourage jury nullification. Some will do so actively. Even bringing it up can have consequences. That power exists because you cannot be compelled to explain your verdict. Know it's an option, exercise it wisely, spread the word well away from the courtroom, but under no circumstances should you reveal/hint/imply/confirm that you've exercised that power, or are contemplating doing so.
Senior Member
How does that make you a great juror?
Senior Member
...perhaps I should rephrase....how does basing a verdict on "conscience", rather than evidence, make you a "great" juror?
Established Member
I've been called a couple times. Served once. Civil trial. In this jurisdiction, very little lets you out of the selection process. I saw people try with no success.
However, once you are in the process, it is obvious where the lawyers questions are leading, and what answers would get you off the jury. I kind of wanted to go through it, expecting from the very brief summary we were given, that it would be a one day trial.
Wrong. A very simple case, a guy wanted to commit suicide, so charged out of his house with a butcher knife toward a cop. Three different cops could have taken the shot, but the one being assaulted put three shots in him and put him down. Guy lives, sues cop, department, and city for excessive use of force, and failure to train the cop in how to handled a mentally disturbed person.
Somehow, the lawyers managed to introduce a full day and a half of totally irrelevant information, about what this guy had done previous to the encounter. None of which had anything to do with a cop shooting a (the guy played college football, as a hint to his size) fellow attacking him with a knife. The plaintiff brought in an expert witness about the shooting, and he actually said, no, the defendant did just what he was trained to do. Shoot until the subject goes down.
The jury agreed quickly that there was no case, except for one fellow, who wanted the defendant to worry overnight. So we had to come back in on the third day, to formalize the vote, and go give it to the judge.
The lawyers interviewed us after, and I said they ruined half their case by all the extra and useless information, and the expert witness blew their own case out of the water. The cops could have probably handled it a little better, but there were several quick time judgement calls and then the culmination of the attack, and shooting. The female lawyer had seemed very cold in the courtroom, but was much more personable during the jury interview. (Which was optional for us, btw.)
It was in the federal courthouse, and I always arrived when the doors opened, came in and made coffee in the jury room, and flirted with the lady that herded the jury around. Was a good experience mostly, but now I've been there and done that.
TJ
Order of Kilopi
I've told this story here before, but I'll repeat it anyhow:
I was on a DUI case. The defense attorney asked what I did for a living. I said I was an engineer. He was basing his defense on "the machine must have been wrong" and asked,"Do you understand that things can go wrong with machines?" "Sure," I said, "most of what I do is figuring out what's gone wrong with machines." Man, did he love the idea of having me on the jury after that!
It would have gone better for his client if he'd actually presented EVIDENCE that there was anything wrong with the machine. Guilty.
Six months later the state supreme court tossed every conviction ever registered with that machine. Hmmmm.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.
Established Member
Trying not to sidetrack, but who cares about evidence? If a mother with two kids is facing 25 years for possessing 3 grams of weed, I'm voting not guilty. Doesn't matter if she did it or not. Knowing that the sentencing is immoral, I choose to vote against conviction. Be advised that some states have a three strike rule. Third misdemeanor is considered a felony.
Luckily it only works one way. You can vote not guilty all day long, but if everyone votes guilty, the judge can still declare mistrial. Let's say a girl claims to be a virgin and was raped. Semen is analysed and does not match the defendant. You vote guilty because you've been persuaded. At that point the judge takes the evidence into consideration and finds the jury to be incompetent.
Jury nullification is fantastic. I don't ask myself if you did it. I ask myself if the punishment will be appropriate for what you did. Looking at Nowhere Man's pot case, two of the charges are saying the same thing. Possession of a weapon. I'm not going to charge you 6 times for the same crime. Let one go through, and nullify the rest.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote