ARGGGHHHHHHH... JURY DUTY 2 HOURS AWAY!!

[windshieldbug]

Cheer up... maybe you’ll get a case where a saxophone is accused of being sharp and late in the National Anthem!

[Three Valves]

No poin in making a Federal case out of it...

[Three Valves]

I had to apologize to the victim and admonish the prosecutor following my last jury trial ending in acquittal. The prosecution brought no corroborating witnesses to an alleged assault that included two other assailants being tried separately. His defense was “those other two guys did it”

Complete waste of time.

Since then, unsubstantiated allegations have only grown in popularity!!

[windshieldbug]

”those other two guys did it”

I’ve used that excuse after hitting a clam, and if you look over at the trombones fast enough the Music Director might buy it!

[Ace]

I've made it clear to lawyers and prosecutors (interviewing potential jurors) that - if I'm to be forced into disrupting my life for token pay - ~EVERYONE~ is GUILTY-GUILTY-GUILTY !!!

...and I've always been dismissed from jury duty after making that statement.

Likewise. When interviewed for the panel, I clearly stated that if someone is accused of a crime, I automatically assume they are guilty. Got me off jury duty every time.

Ace

[tofu]

To the OP: Back in college I spent the summers as a circuit court clerk and you can ask for a delay in date to serve or even show extenuating circumstances as to why you can't serve as it would create a severe hardship upon yourself and your family. I'm not sure if that also applies at the Federal Court Level, but certainly worth asking about. A delay is fairly easy to get granted.

To the people who shirk their public duty - shame on you. Stop complaining about crime and poor verdicts etc. if you are unwilling to participate in being part of the solution - then you become part of the problem. Many people never get called for jury duty and few get called more than once or twice in their life times and of those who get called a very small percentage actually get selected to be polled for a jury and of those polled an even smaller percentage actually end up on a jury. And very few cases last more than a day or two. Most people who get called for jury duty end up being released before noon. It's a small price to pay in order to insure we have a fair and impartial court system. Maybe some day you get charged with something - you will want your jury to be made up of competent, fair and impartial peers.

One of the most important of our rights it the USA is the right to be tried by a jury of our peers. If competent people are unwilling to serve we end up with juries composed of less than competent people. And this is why you sometimes see verdicts that just leave you scratching your head. Like getting millions for spilling hot coffee on yourself.

[Mike C855B]

I've been summoned for duty three times. First time was a county superior court, and received the summons as I was moving 2800 miles away to a new job. I wouldn't have minded serving, but, oh, the commute. The response form considered the extenuating scenario and I didn't have to report for selection.

Second was federal. I enjoyed it, they treated us very well, with appreciation and courtesy. Nice jury room kept stocked with drinks and snacks. I recall the second or third day after a moderate snowfall the prior night... having a 4x4 before they were popular I was the only juror there at the appointed hour, so was sent home. We convicted the drug dealer, although to this day, 20 years later, I still feel the evidence was sketchy and the probable cause for the traffic stop was trumped-up. Lawyers on both sides were pretty young and seemed a little green, memory recalling that it was the first time one of 'em was solo on a federal case.

Third was a local county court civil case, and, frankly, was the kind of protracted jury case that IMO drives the inclination to shirk one's civic responsibility. Traffic accident, farmer pickup truck vs. motorcycle on open highway, suit was mostly over lost wages and assertion of permanent disability. I was dismissed during polling having problems with both litigants - the farmer was 90 or 95 and was questionable whether he should have been driving at all, the biker wasn't wearing a helmet. Apparently the trial went on for weeks - yes, there were insurance company lawyers in the mix - to a pretty much foregone conclusion anyway, medical only, no wages.

It would be interesting to see if I'm called a fourth time. I wouldn't mind a repeat of the federal experience; the local, not so much.

[Donn]

I don't mind serving as a juror, or I guess I wouldn't mind, if I had ever been selected. The last time I went in, though, there were something like a 100 people, waiting around for one or two trials. That's a pretty high ratio of wasting people's time, vs. service.

[Ace]

”those other two guys did it”

I’ve used that excuse after hitting a clam, and if you look over at the trombones fast enough the Music Director might buy it!

That is a humorous post! Thanks.

Ace

[iiipopes]

As a person who has tried many cases on both sides of the table in my "prior life" and testified extensively in a couple more, please disregard all the **** above and know that you are very much appreciated for doing your civic duty to show up for the panel. Yes, the case may settle. Yes, you may be excused. Yes, you may actually serve. Yes, the per diem is nominal and the inconvenience considerable. Yes, sometimes the results are inexplicable and imperfect. In any event, thank you in advance for honoring the summons for the second most important duty to keep our country's Constitution working after voting. Having been an intern in other country's legal systems while studying abroad, ours is the best system in the world, even with its foibles.

[hup_d_dup]

Most people consider themselves to be patriots.

But sometimes, maybe not.

Hup

[bort]

I got to be a jury foreman once back in NYC (where you get Jury duty constantly!). It was kind of interesting, even if the case itself was completely boring (some minor accident of a pedestrian getting hit by a car on the Upper West side of Manhattan, and suing the driver). It took about 7 days to get through everything... result... careless pedestrian, car driver did what he could given the circumstances. Some medical consequences were pre-existing. No compensation awarded, judge disappointed that these people couldn't have worked things out on their own outside of court.

Seemed pretty obvious to me that money was not a concern for either of these people, and it probably went to court (and took a full 7 days) because they truly didn't like each other. Even still, I can only imagine the attorney fees.

[iiipopes]

...and hey...as far as the guilty thing...
...I'd wager (could it be proved) that most who are wrongly convicted (a very small percentage, I believe) are - instead - nearly always guilty of other things just as bad or worse.

Are you claiming this statement as justification for the result in any particular case? Or just throwing mud on the Constitution?

[Three Valves]

...usually.

[iiipopes]

neither...I just suspect that "the usual suspects" are suspect.

That may be, but that is between the person and the person's maker, not in court (with limited exceptions that the explanation and application of which go way beyond this forum).

[iiipopes]

Enjoy your flights, Mr. Pope !

Aw, just call me Scott. Thanks. My party band is flying to Mexico the first week of February for a week of R&R and playing gigs in conjunction with the ex-pat sailboat club to raise money to purchase building supplies for the local school system, which we do every year since tourism in the area is growing, and as a corollary people moving in with their families for the employment opportunities. Our keyboard player is a retired air traffic controller with a distinguished career. That is no assurance of safe or hassle-free travel, but so long as the gentleman you mentioned is sober at work, and the gov't shutdown ends so the airports and TSA will function, and if a wall is built is it less than 30,000 feet tall....

[cjk]

https://definitions.uslegal.com/u/undue ... y-service/" target="_blank

According to 28 USCS § 1869 [Title 28. Judiciary and Judicial Procedure; Part v. Procedure ; Chapter 121. Juries; Trials by Jury] undue hardship or extreme inconvenience, as a basis for excuse from immediate jury service under section 1866(c)(1) of this chapter [28 USCS § 1866(c)(1)], shall mean “great distance, either in miles or traveltime, from the place of holding court, grave illness in the family or any other emergency which outweighs in immediacy and urgency the obligation to serve as a juror when summoned, or any other factor which the court determines to constitute an undue hardship or to create an extreme inconvenience to the juror; and in addition, in situations where it is anticipated that a trial or grand jury proceeding may require more than thirty days of service, the court may consider, as a further basis for temporary excuse, severe economic hardship to an employer which would result from the absence of a key employee during the period of such service.”

[bearphonium]

I have been called for jury duty at both the municipal level and circuit court level (city and state courts). I have never been as far as the jury box, but I don't think I'd ever stay. Something about 28 years as a full-time deputy and 4 years part time in courthouse security tells me I never will.