Jury Duty

[joeychitwood]

Despite being a licensed peace officer for 13 years and working in the ER for 26, I was placed on the county grand jury for 2013. More surprisingly, I was made grand jury foreman by the judge, who knows me well. I've found it very interesting, but was a little taken aback when I had to sign my first first-degree murder indictment.

[crew]

Originally Posted by cop414

Wow John, that's gotta be some kind of record!

I was thinking the same thing Tim.
I even called the Commissioner of Jurors office and asked if I was being singled out for some reason. I seem to get called almost immediately upon expiration of my time exemption from previous service. My brother is 10 years older than I am and has been called only once. We live in the same town.

[cop414]

Originally Posted by crew

I was thinking the same thing Tim.
I even called the Commissioner of Jurors office and asked if I was being singled out for some reason. I seem to get called almost immediately upon expiration of my time exemption from previous service. My brother is 10 years older than I am and has been called only once. We live in the same town.

Now that's kinda strange...

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by crew

I was thinking the same thing Tim.
I even called the Commissioner of Jurors office and asked if I was being singled out for some reason. I seem to get called almost immediately upon expiration of my time exemption from previous service. My brother is 10 years older than I am and has been called only once. We live in the same town.

They may have discovered that your one of the few who listens and think.

[East Bay Rider]

Originally Posted by SUBversive

They may have discovered that your one of the few who listens and think.

My bride has never been called yet I've gone 3 times. She's pretty sharp and I know she'd enjoy and understand the process as she was a legal secretary way back when we first met. If only there were a way for her to volunteer.

[joeychitwood]

Serving on the grand jury has really renewed my faith in the justice system. The jurors I work with take their duty very seriously and take absolutely no shortcuts in deliberations. From the least educated to the most, from the least sophisticated to the most, they all perform their task admirably. I have been very uplifted by the experience.

[looking to buy]

I would like to post an alternative view to what has been expressed here. I know that in the past alternative views have not always been readily accepted on TRF. But here goes anyway.

I am not a big fan of the jury system as is. It sounds like many of you in this post are current or ex government workers and so I can understand that you may have a difference of opinion. Let me try to express my point of view.

I was called last week. My wife was called last year. Both of us are self employed and we live in California. The state of Ca has a very rigid law that does not allow you to get out of jury duty except for very specific situations. The county we live in, Ventura, enforces that law rigidly.

When called we are given a week period that we may or may not be selected. So, my wife is a doctor and she has patients. She did not want to spend the entire week waiting to see if called and cancel all patients so she kept them on the books. She was told that if selected she had to call and cancel all patients for the then unknown duration of a trial. Huge financial hit for her.

I have a phone with me at all times and a laptop. If I do not answer calls I can loose lots of business. It could equal thousands. I was told as long as I can pay my bill then that is too bad.

A man on the panel of those to be selected told the judge he had 6 employees who do not speak English. If selected he would have to lay them off for the period of the trial and that would harm their families. The judge informed him that under CA law that was too bad, but nothing he, the judge could do.

The case they were looking at for me and for my wife, both happened to be money cases. Someone claimed that someone else owed them money and would not pay. So, the system is saying to people such as my wife and myself and the man with 6 workers "these people have a money dispute, you or others may lose thousands but it is your job to help them resolve it." Now in truth I am completely unconcerned about their money dispute. The price to me and society is way too high. So, let a judge decide or let professional jurors decided. Or let those who work on a fixed income for governments or large corporations, where there is plenty of employee depth to cover the absence. But people who are self employed have to pay a huge financial penalty that others who are not self employed do not have to pay. That is unjust.

People who claimed financial hardship had to stand in front of 59 other potential jurors and and explain why they are broke. Extremely embarrassing for them.

Now I realize that the founding fathers, wanted trial by jury to avoid unjust jail time for people who ran afoul of the government. So, I fully understand the importance of a trial by a non professional jury in those cases where governmental entities are bringing charges.

So, a criminal case where someone could lose their freedom. Yes, I get it. A money case etc where the cost to the juror or society may exceed the importance of the case, no I do not get it.

We are told it is our civic duty. And then we are told if we do not do our civic duty we will be fined or jailed. And then we are required to take an oath in front of the judge that says we can be criminal prosecuted as jurors. So to me this is indentured servitude and not an honor.


These laws were made by people who are exempt from duty and then they make an attempt to sell it to us as a civic duty.

Any Pleasant comments?

[joeychitwood]

Originally Posted by looking to buy

I would like to post an alternative view to what has been expressed here. I know that in the past alternative views have not always been readily accepted on TRF. But here goes anyway.

I am not a big fan of the jury system as is. It sounds like many of you in this post are current or ex government workers and so I can understand that you may have a difference of opinion. Let me try to express my point of view.

I was called last week. My wife was called last year. Both of us are self employed and we live in California. The state of Ca has a very rigid law that does not allow you to get out of jury duty except for very specific situations. The county we live in, Ventura, enforces that law rigidly.

When called we are given a week period that we may or may not be selected. So, my wife is a doctor and she has patients. She did not want to spend the entire week waiting to see if called and cancel all patients so she kept them on the books. She was told that if selected she had to call and cancel all patients for the then unknown duration of a trial. Huge financial hit for her.

I have a phone with me at all times and a laptop. If I do not answer calls I can loose lots of business. It could equal thousands. I was told as long as I can pay my bill then that is too bad.

A man on the panel of those to be selected told the judge he had 6 employees who do not speak English. If selected he would have to lay them off for the period of the trial and that would harm their families. The judge informed him that under CA law that was too bad, but nothing he, the judge could do.

The case they were looking at for me and for my wife, both happened to be money cases. Someone claimed that someone else owed them money and would not pay. So, the system is saying to people such as my wife and myself and the man with 6 workers "these people have a money dispute, you or others may lose thousands but it is your job to help them resolve it." Now in truth I am completely unconcerned about their money dispute. The price to me and society is way too high. So, let a judge decide or let professional jurors decided. Or let those who work on a fixed income for governments or large corporations, where there is plenty of employee depth to cover the absence. But people who are self employed have to pay a huge financial penalty that others who are not self employed do not have to pay. That is unjust.

People who claimed financial hardship had to stand in front of 59 other potential jurors and and explain why they are broke. Extremely embarrassing for them.

Now I realize that the founding fathers, wanted trial by jury to avoid unjust jail time for people who ran afoul of the government. So, I fully understand the importance of a trial by a non professional jury in those cases where governmental entities are bringing charges.

So, a criminal case where someone could lose their freedom. Yes, I get it. A money case etc where the cost to the juror or society may exceed the importance of the case, no I do not get it.

We are told it is our civic duty. And then we are told if we do not do our civic duty we will be fined or jailed. And then we are required to take an oath in front of the judge that says we can be criminal prosecuted as jurors. So to me this is indentured servitude and not an honor.


These laws were made by people who are exempt from duty and then they make an attempt to sell it to us as a civic duty.

Any Pleasant comments?

I am sympathetic to your points, Bob. I think there are times when a judge could easily rules in many or most non-criminal cases.

[skypilot]

I made my living as an insurance investigator primarily investigating possible claims against school districts. I was called to jury duty twice and was immediately excused both times after being asked my profession.
My wife, a housewife, has been called twice and was picked for a jury both times.
An excellent trial attorney with whom I worked explained that I wasn't selected because someone who knows how to evaluate evidence is the last thing they want while my wife was chosen because she is attractive.
My owns years of experience with the legal system led me to conclude that most cases are decided based more on emotion than on reason.

[cop414]

Bob, I can see your point of view 100%.

[crew]

Originally Posted by cop414

Bob, I can see your point of view 100%.

Me too.

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by cop414

Bob, I can see your point of view 100%.

I see your point to a point. If you ever have a jury trial civil or criminal you might wish the jury panel wasn't all incompetents.

[Dr.Brian]

Well, I was not excused from jury duty next week. Up until now, I had been excused by answering "yes" to many of the screening questions and pointing out that I am a physician at a busy hospital, and it would be a burden to my patients, colleagues and partners to serve for an extended period. It didn't fly this time.
I hope to be excused when I do my call in the day before.
If I get selected for a trial for several days it will be a disaster at work.
However I will take comfort in knowing that instead of taking care of a bunch of sick kids at the countries best children's hospital, I'll be doing a service for my community and making $6.00 a day, which doesn't even pay for latte and a croissant at Starbucks on the drive over.

[Dr.Brian]

It's $9/day! I can afford that latte!!! However it is 10-15 miles away. 12mpg...$3.50/gal... yeah, no latte.

[cop414]

Good luck Doc!

[Trouble15]

Originally Posted by Dr.Brian

It's $9/day! I can afford that latte!!! However it is 10-15 miles away. 12mpg...$3.50/gal... yeah, no latte.

[Trouble15]

Originally Posted by cop414

Bob, I can see your point of view 100%.

Same here. I have a friend who was told if she was picked for grand jury, for a case grabbing national attention that's going on now I won't mention any specifics, she would have to be there about 3 times a week for about 6 months! She told them she has bills to pay, and her company will only pay her salary for the first 5 days of jury duty. She literally can not afford to serve any longer. The response was basically too bad. This really makes no sense at all. Regardless, luckily she was not selected.

[Scot_3]

Years ago I was called for the Manuel Noriega trial, didn't serve. I remember thinking that they must have called all of Tampa,

[AzPaul]

Hope it works out the way you want it to.

If you do wind up serving, here's a little tip for you: They're all lying

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by Dr.Brian

Well, I was not excused from jury duty next week. Up until now, I had been excused by answering "yes" to many of the screening questions and pointing out that I am a physician at a busy hospital, and it would be a burden to my patients, colleagues and partners to serve for an extended period. It didn't fly this time.
I hope to be excused when I do my call in the day before.
If I get selected for a trial for several days it will be a disaster at work.
However I will take comfort in knowing that instead of taking care of a bunch of sick kids at the countries best children's hospital, I'll be doing a service for my community and making $6.00 a day, which doesn't even pay for latte and a croissant at Starbucks on the drive over.

Believe me I'm not getting up in your grill about this and I'd much prefer you to be working at a children's hospital of course ....

But civil jury service is one of the cornerstones of this democracy. That service is very important to the system. Clearly it's a big big sacrifice and if you explain your situation you might be excused by cause by one side or the other if they get the sense that you are angry about being there. I know I'd worry about someone like that sitting there.

But "quality" jurors all have a life, work, career family issues. Think about the makeup of the jury panel with no one like you on it. Jury's with unemployed folk who have nothing but free time .... Hmmmm think about that?

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by AzPaul

Hope it works out the way you want it to.

If you do wind up serving, here's a little tip for you: They're all lying

Probably true ..... Even on Voir dire

[joeychitwood]

I second SUBversive's thoughts. Jury duty is inconvenient and time-consuming, but it is a responsibility we have as Americans. My time on the grand jury was both interesting and revolting. As a physician, I had respect for the other non-medical jurors as horrible murder scene and autopsy photos were shown. When all was done, I found the the experience to be positive. I was impressed with the sincerity and commitment of the other jurors, and I regained some respect for the jury system.

[Dr.Brian]

The problem is that I am scheduled to cover ORs 4 days a week. Usually 2 with residents or fellows, or alone at remote locations or surgery centers.
So, I got someone else to cover my assignment next week, something that only 8 other faculty can do. Someone else now has to come in and work on their "academic day" to cover for that person. Academic days are for administrative and research pursuits that are required of the faculty. Not a problem for a day, no different than a sick call out, etc.
However, if I'm selected and have to sit on a trial for 5-15 or ??? days, that's a problem. Parents schedule their kids surgeries months in advance and I can't just close an OR location for a few weeks and tell the parents tough luck. Is it fair to pull my partners out of their academic time to cover for me? No. I think not. They have their own lectures, committees, and research to do, some of which is time sensitive and/or cannot be changed.
It doesn't seem very fair to me. But the $9 a day vs $9/min is appealing, and I have a book to read.
If it didn't inconvenience everyone else, I wouldn't care. Of course for that to happen, I'd have to block out a few weeks months in advance as vacation time and hope to be selected. That sounds like a plan!

[locutus49]

Can a lawyer weigh in: I heard that if you were guilty, you should always ask for a jury, as there is a chance someone will be moved by a sob story.

But if you are innocent, you should ask for a bench trial (judge decides), as a judge is trained to think critically and not be swayed by emotion. He will analyze the facts.

True or not?

PS: I'm always exempted, for certain reasons. Too bad, as i desperately want to participate in a jury. And if the jury is deadlocked, I can brag to the wife that I'm hung.

[Headshrinker]

I served once, had to sit thru looking at 250 pictures of child porn. The head of the local Water Works Department got twelve years for sharing that filth with a dozen other men.

[dba]

As a police officer in California, I was ineligible for jury duty. Since I retired and moved to Nevada, I got called into Federal Court on a criminal case.

I was excused without being seated because I didn’t feel I could be objective. Some people think it’s crazy to trust your life to twelve people who weren’t smart enough to get out of jury duty but the system in the US is better than a lot of other countries.

And as Josh Lyman from “The West Wing” said, “If you don’t serve, you don’t get to complain about the OJ verdict!”

[Rock]

Since my last post on this thread I was called up again.
I am retired so I consider it my duty to raise the average IQ on the jury a bit as it was woefully low on my last one.
We are fairly 'casual' up here in the tropics but I always wear business attire as I think the defendent has a right to be able to look at his 'peers' and feel that he will be tried by people who took the whole thing seriously enough to have a shower and wear a coat.
I was called twice and challenged twice by the defence. One of the other Jurors said "they don't like the look of you - you look like you're too smart".
Whether it was my prior employment with the Police or my dress sense I couldn't say but the defence didn't like the look of me. Shame because I was happy to do my duty.

[Casey VP-26]

I was called for jury duty here in Pennsylvania a few years ago and the call date was for the first day of hunting season. I copied my Pa. hunting license which I had purchased before their letter was sent to me and told them this was a 15 year family tradition. They returned a letter and said I was excused.

[Dr.Brian]

The verdict is in.
Excused.

[seand442]

I am currently ineligible to serve, but look forward to the retired life when I might be able to. I've spent enough time in court to know that a jury of your peers can be a very eclectic mix of people, whose only resemblance to a peer is that they are breathing.