Just got off of a Jury...

[mountainclmbr]

I have been on jury duty many times as I feel it is my duty in a free country. I have been on a capital murder case where I was one of two of the 12 to vote guilty. After the trial, the starry eyed liberals felt betrayed at the evidence that was withheld. The evidence was overwhelming, but illogic was in abundance.

I was also on a jury where the police obviously trumped up the charges. At about the time it was apparent to me, the judge sent us out of the room and dismissed the case. When he came back to our room and stated what I saw as apparent, I really felt proud at the way the system worked.

Before and after that I have been disappointed at times and happy at times when I knew the outcome of a case, and also knew the facts that may not be permitted in court.

In the end it seems like a game between lawyers with a judge that may invisibly inject personal bias one way or the other. I will avoid the "system" if I am able.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I won't ever serve on a jury because I will never believe anything a cop says.
You do realize that they ARE allowed to lie don't you?

Not under oath. That doesn't mean they won't, but they can be charged with perjury.

The simplest of facts is that we wouldn't have tials if everyone told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Trials exist to prove that someone is lying.

 

[yy]

It is _not_ fashionable to beat jury duty. Do not listen to the scoundrels/comedians who scoff at the people "who can't even get out of jury duty." The scoffers are every bit a part of the problem in our legal system as the oft-denigraded lawyers or the corrupt judges.

The next time a scoffer gets in a trial, remember to thank those of us who feel a "duty" to actually give up pay to make the system work better.

I happened to stand by each time I was put on the stand-by jury pool. I'd be happy to spout off my libertarian views. And probably get excused by the prosecution. But I'd be proud to serve if I get past the initial juror selection.

Why? like I said, to make the system work better.

 

[mljdeckard]

"Too stupid to get out of jury duty."

Depends on where you are, and the current climate of the system. The first time I was excused from duty in 1994, the judge described the selection process, and said that it had become so full of exceptions that only unemployed homeless were about to serve. He said that in HIS court, he could count on one hand the number of people he had excused for hardship in the last year. Granting exceptions to everyone who thinks they are important for any given reason means that the quality of jury pools will suffer.

 

[Nitrogen]

I'm surprised so many red-blooded, proud Americans don't feel the need to participate in our judicial system.

In fact, I'm ashamed. To me, it's as bad as not voting. You don't vote, you don't get to complain about the government; you get the government you deserve.

If you don't participate in the justice system, you get the justice system you deserve.

 

[Tommygunn]

+1 Nitrogen
I have been called for jury duty twice, once in 2003 and the second time this past August. The first time I was vore dired (SP?) off the jury (it was a murder trial and dang it, I was a member of the N.R.A.) The second time I spent a week being shuffled around for civil cases...but again never actually got past that pesky voire dire condition.
Both times I considered it my duty as a citizen to attend. I would do so again when called.
And yes, I would use "jury nullification" if it applied. As John Jay, the first chief justice of the supreme court, said; "The jury has as much right to try the law in question as they do the facts." It should be as valid today as it was at the time John Jay helped author The Federalist Papers except judges and lawyers REALLY HATE IT when they discover us peons actually know about it.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Called twice

Back in the day, when I was a single dad, I received a summons on two occasions. Both times I called the clerk's office to find out how to arrange it around school and babysitting. Both times they simply excused me.

I've often wondered if I'd be allowed to serve on a jury.

I have a problem with bull manure, and I'm afraid it tends to show through when people ask dishonestly constructed or loaded questions.

I wrote some software for an attorney many years ago, and the old saying is true: "Those who love sausage or respect the law should never watch either one being made."

It's not the police who are allowed to lie. The officers, witnesses, and defendant are all compelled to tell the truth.

The LAWYERS are not under oath and are protected. They are permitted to allege things they know are not true. They may construct questions that contain references to "facts" that are actually falsehoods.

Consequently, I don't trust the attorneys. I'm afraid that would "print" through visibly and get me disqualified.

Who knows? I may never get to find out. I've not been summoned in decades.

 

[North Texan]

I would actually like to serve on a jury, but I can't seem to survive the selection process.:banghead: I think sometimes the attorneys see me and think "Something's wrong. This guy WANTS to serve." Then I get voted off the island.

 

[chaim]

I received my notice three times but never got to serve (I'd actually like to).

The first time the lawyers asked who had cops as friends or family. I raised my hand since I had a friend who was a cop. Then they asked who had been the victim of a violent crime (I don't remember if it was open ended or "within the past x years") and I raised my hand since it was only a few years after the situation where a buddy and I were jumped by 5 guys and I was sent to the hospital. Everyone in both groups were sent home.

The second time I got notice from Baltimore City in the mail a day or two before I moved out of Baltimore City. I sent a letter notifying them that I wouldn't be a City resident by the time I was to serve jury duty and didn't hear another thing.

The third time it was a Muslim defendant. I'm an Orthodox Jew and there is no missing it since I wear the yarmulke. The defendant's lawyer clearly wanted me out of there due to my religion (I was called up to the Judge's bench with the defense attorney and prosecutor to discuss it). In the end, they used the excuse that it was a Friday trial (and even though the Judge assured everyone that she'd let everyone out well before the sabbath began, and if more time was needed we'd come back Monday) and the defense was "worried" that I may try to rush the decision if time got near the beginning of the sabbath and the prosecutor didn't want to argue about it anymore after about 30 seconds. Ironically, if anything I'd be more inclinded to see him favorably due to his religion- while Islam and Judaism obviously have their differences, I am very religious and feel a kind of bond with others who are as well (plus, there are many similarities between Islam and Orthodox Judaism).

 

[S&W620]

Jury duty must be approached in the same manner we all use in our daily lives.

Use common sense.

As far as LEO's being able to lie, well I don't know about that.

 

[lbmii]

As advocates of the 2nd amendment and as advocates for justice we really must try to be on Juries.

Learn from this one guys:

I was on a jury in a case where a man shot at a guy with an M1 carbine (a military automatic assault rifle as we were constantly pounded with). The guy missed and the bullet hit a concrete wall right to the front and side of the other guy’s head. Concrete sprayed into the guy’s head and chest like a shotgun blast and caused some pretty bad injury and bleeding.

The guy shot was just out of nine years in prison for multiple burglaries and assault and batteries and was about 28 years old 6 foot 6 with a “lift weights in prison all day long for 9 years” very pronounced muscular build. He had his whole back and arms covered in White Power prison tattoos. One of his triceps had “White” the other had “Power” in bold prison ink pin tattoo lettering. Plus he had the spider web tattoos, the shaved head and the combat boots.

The guy doing the shooting was an older man in his upper 50s he was thin and sickly in his build and his profession was that of a local radio talk show host. Neither of the men had met before.

It all started when the White Power guy out of the blue started to bang very hard on the radio host’s apartment door all while shouting a bunch of obscenities. He then moved down the hall to the next apartment and started banging on it.

The radio host guy and other tenants had had a number of burglaries that month. His wife called the police and he went and challenged the skinhead out in the shared hallway. “Who are you and what the hell are you doing?” sort of thing. It went real down hill real fast. A younger 16-year-old skinhead joined the big prison skinhead. The radio host guy found himself in one hell of a deal with a hardcore felon.

The catharsis moment for the radio host came when the skinhead told him that the he was going “to kick his f head in, kill his dog, and that kill fat pig wife of his.” The skinhead then advances towards him. The radio host runs for his life into his apartment and grabs his M1 carbine. His wife is on the phone to the police and the phone is recording the whole commotion on the police tape. He said he thought the guy was right behind him chasing him but as he turned around with his carbine the guy was not there. He runs to his apartment door and steps out into the hall and sees the big and little skinhead going away down the hallway. The skinheads turn and see the guy with the carbine. The little skinhead bolts down the stairway. The big skinhead turns around and says something along the line of "oh yeah what you going to do now" and starts towards the guy.

The radio host guy has the carbine (that he said he had not fired in at least 30 years) at his hip. He has a loaded magazine in the carbine but no round in the chamber. He starts to fumble around with it using his left (weak) hand to try to cock it while holding the carbine with his right hand and hip with his finger in the trigger guard. The whole time the skinhead is coming right at him. He pulls the bolt back and snaps it closed. At which point the carbine fires with the bullet going down range striking the wall at a shallow angle spraying the skinhead with concrete and putting him to flight. You could hear on the police tape the click click snap/bang exactly as the guy had said. I inspected the spent round and it was covered in green corrosion (like it had been around at least 30 years).

If I was not on that jury I absolutely know that the radio host would have got seven years. It took every talent that I had to keep this guy from hard time. The suburbia soccer moms in that jury were going to make a point in punishing him for having an assault rifle. They constantly brought up “military assault rifle” in the jury room. Two of them brought up something they had seen on Oprah about assault rifles. A number of the jury members brought up that he was one of those right wing AM radio guys. We gave the guy an up to one-year misdemeanor. The whole thing was he left his apartment to confront the guy after the guy was moving away. Frankly I have a feeling I would have done similar as this guy but I hope I would not have made the many tactical and legal mistakes this guy made. Of course this guy did not wake up that morning and say: “Hey I think I’ll go shoot me a prison skinhead felon today.” But I will tell you that the skinhead did wake up that day and pretty much figured he was going to go out find him some trouble or some trouble was going to go find him.

Anyway get yourself on those juries.

 

[DesertShooter]

Let's see: All prison and jail inmates are "innocent"...right? All police officers "lie", and that's how those "innocent" folks ended up going to prison or jail...right?

I was a LEO for 31 years, and spent a LOT of time in court. Every time I testified, my words were the TRUTH. I would NEVER have put myself into jeopardy by lying while under oath!

Most law schools have courses on courtroom demeanor and how to "rattle" professional witnesses. I know that for a FACT, for I have several family members that are attorneys, and they "practised" their "rattling" skills on ME! In a way, it was interesting to be the subject of their "rattling", for I learned most of the tricks that they had been taught.

I had one particular defense attorney call me a "liar" during my testimony! It wasn't veiled, he simply burst out with, "Officer, you're lying!". Of course, the prosecutor objected, and that outburst didn't cut it with the judge. It also "tainted" the "honor" of that defense attorney, at least in a way! His client was found guilty! Later, I ran into that defense attorney in the lobby of the courthouse, and he APOLOGIZED to me! He said that he had tried to "rattle" me with that outburst. I sort of "slapped" him, verbally, by telling him to find some moral values!

By the way, this post was oddly timed, for I was on jury duty all week (on-call, but not needed to show up). I think that I'd make an EXCELLENT juror, with my LEO background....but I don't think that any defense attorney would allow me to sit on a jury. My wife has been dismissed from jury selections several times, merely for being the wife of a LEO!

 

[kevin davis]

I will never be allowed to serve on a jury in
south texas. I am a physicican and the lawyers here want the most ignorant people they can find so they can try to lead them by the nose. Then of course with all the delays and continuances, i could not take that kind of time. Once, when I was the expert witness, the case was dismissed and the prosecutor did not even let me know.

 

[Spare]

Going to school in Boston, I got my first jury duty notice in my freshman year, I had only been in the state for about 6 months. I went and was dismissed. I got two more notices during the 3 year period in which I do not have to go since I went to the first one, and I just got another one last month (post-three year period) so i will be going once again. All but one of the people I know from college have been called, most of them multiple times. It seems like they really target the college kids.

 

[buzz_knox]

The LAWYERS are not under oath and are protected. They are permitted to allege things they know are not true. They may construct questions that contain references to "facts" that are actually falsehoods.

No, they aren't. A lawyer has only so much leeway in questions as the judge allows. Arguing that something is contrary to established facts or assumes facts not in evidence is a sure way to get an objection. If the court overrules the objection, it's grounds for an appeal.

Further, lawyers are required to only argue points that they have a reasonable belief are true. That's in the rules of civil procedure in practically every jurisdiction, and is also a basic tenant in nearly every legal canon.

 

[Big Calhoun]

Been called twice but never served when I lived in New Jersey. The first time I was excused because I was the Project Manager for a huge roll-out for our company at the time....adverse effects on employment/business. The second time was a glitch b/c I had just moved to another county and not had my license changed over yet. By time I reported, it was changed, and I was excused for being a nonresident of the County.

If I had another opportunity to serve, I would.

 

[ilbob]

I won't ever serve on a jury because I will never believe anything a cop says. You do realize that they ARE allowed to lie don't you?

I think that is a little strong.

Cops learn the tricks of the trade. If they believe something to be true, by God it is true and they are unshakable, and that is what they testify to. "No doubt at all".

Most regular citizens are honest enough to admit they could be wrong, and will say so on the witness stand.

 

[wingman]

Having served a number of times my only thought is I never want to be judged by the folks I have served with, second the rule of law only works for the very wealthy.

 

[ilbob]

jurt duty here is $40 a day. I mention this since I saw one post indicating pay as a reason to drop people from the pool.

$5 an hour???? no wonder so many people want to serve on juries.

The jury pay in my county does not even cover the parking garage fee and lunch.

 

[ksnecktieman]

I am with the group that says,,,, If you do not vote, do not complain about the politicians that get in. AND if you avoid jury duty, expect it to be decided by someone who does not care even a little bit about law, and/or justice. And we all know that the law, and justice are sometimes opposites.

Lawyers, prosecuting, or defending, are not paid to find TRUTH, they are paid to "win at any cost", for their side. This system of law is called "adversarial" because it is a war. The system is not perfect, but it is the best one that has been devised, so far.

The judge is only a referee for the lawyers battle.

The Jury is the most important component of the trial. Justice can come only from a good jury. Support for the law can come from any jury. A good jury will judge the facts, the litigants, and the law, and try to find truth.

 

[slzy]

recently i was on a jury,and we asked the judge why some were excluded and he just shrugged and said he has seen police officers,lawyers,sitting judges ,and yes ,doctors sitting in the jury box. might have been the trial lawyers had exhausted their challenges and had no choice,but don;t automatically dismiss yourself for any reason.

 

[DogBonz]

Are you all frigging retarded?

but I am still unhappy that the "system" got in the way.

I will never sit on a jury either. I do not believe in our system. It has absolutley NOTHING to do with JUSTICE. It is nothing but a horse and pony show for lawyers

Now I'm not one for name calling, or one to criticize. I usually believe that people are entitled to their own views (which they are), and if I don’t agree, then I have the right to disagree. But this is making my rectum itch! The “system” that you are all moaning about, the one who lets criminals go free, is the same one that keeps the “secret police” from kicking your door in, tossing your place for any thing that is illegal at any time they want. Our “system” is founded on the principal that it is better to let X number of guilty men go free than to convict one man who is innocent, and that is a system that I can believe in.
It’s also a system where the jury can free a guilty man because they don’t agree with the law. That’s why we all should be on every jury that we can. It’s called nullification. It’s important because of a little thing called (now get a pen and write this down), Judicial Precedent. If I was on a jury where a otherwise innocent person was being tried for possession of a concealed weapon, or using a gun in self defense that he/ she was not licensed to have, I can tell you this; there would be at least a miss trial, because I would never throw a guilty vote in the hat. We can use that to change the system to our advantage.

 

[Waitone]

I just finished a tour of jury duty and must say it restored my confidence in the system. I've seen the system from the inside out and the outside in. I believe LE to be scrupulously honest. The solicitor's office (or District Attorney) is where you get institutional deceit. Lying is their currency. There just doesn't seem to be any moral limitations on what a DA will do and can get away with. I have utmost respect for attorneys in general. I am slavishly appreciative to LE but I wouldn't give a cup of warm spit for the ethics in the DA's office.

I was in the pool for a trial of a strong arm bandido. He had a list of 6 priors ranging from misdemeanors to low end felonies. He was convicted of a strong arm robbery and received a sentence of 22 years.

 

[Marshall]

Take your jury duty as it says it is, a duty.

You can make a difference.

I sat on a jury in a maiming case where a man went into the kitchen, heated a pan of oil to boiling, called his wife into the kitchen, grabbed her and poured the boiling grease on her face. The grease went into one ear and down her neck and chest. He wanted to make sure she was not attractive to other men.

Well, there was one juror that would not vote guilty because he was a religious man and couldn't send anyone to prison. Evidently he could lie though because he swore under oath he could do so if the evidence was present. I know for a fact that if I was not part of the jury, this man would have ended up voting not guilty.

Take it seriously, you may save a life or help someone that needs your help in getting justice served. You may save a wrongfully accused man or woman as well.

 

[October]

Let's be honest guys. Is there a better system out there? Would we rather a king hand out edicts? Rule by law, representation by people qualified in that law may not be a great system, but it's a lot better than any other system in history.

Why not have a system that uses professional juries? Both sides in the trial can use expert witnesses, so why not have experts in the jury box?