MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: StillAWarrior on June 28, 2021, 10:52:22 AM
-
I've been drawn three times in less than five years. This is getting ridiculous.
I went down this morning and they told me that they were "filled up" for today, so I can "go home" and come back tomorrow morning. She very enthusiastically told me, "don't worry, you'll still get credit and paid for today and you don't have to go to work." For just a second, it made me wish I had a job where that was even remotely true. My job doesn't stop when I get jury duty. I just go downtown for the day, spend seven hours doing my civic duty, then work until midnight. The first time I got called I was really happy to have a chance to sit on a jury. It was actually interesting and great experience for me to have in my line of work. But I'm over it now. My wife has been called once -- more than 25 years ago. Hopefully after this I'll be done for another 25 years.
I had been planning to move my daughter to NYC on Friday morning...that's in jeopardy at this point.
Sorry. Rant over.
-
I live overseas. Have been called several times. I usually send them a pro-forma invoice for my service, including business class air fare, consulting fee of $400/hour, 5 star hotel cost, and and offshore bank account to wire the funds in advance. They are, after all, obliged to pay for one's costs to perform the service...
I also include in the letter a few of the most politically incorrect statements of that particular year... mildly, of course.
I also include a request that if they elect to exclude me, they send a written confirmation of same to my US based attorney.
Somehow they've never followed up, but the letter usually comes a few months later.
-
I live overseas. Have been called several times. I usually send them a pro-forma invoice for my service, including business class air fare, consulting fee of $400/hour, 5 star hotel cost, and and offshore bank account to wire the funds in advance. They are, after all, obliged to pay for one's costs to perform the service...
I also include in the letter a few of the most politically incorrect statements of that particular year... mildly, of course.
I also include a request that if they elect to exclude me, they send a written confirmation of same to my US based attorney.
Somehow they've never followed up, but the letter usually comes a few months later.
You could just tell them you don't live in the jurisdiction to which you've been called. I guess you did do that, which rendered all your performative look at what a big fancy man I am demands moot. But you probably weren't writing those demands for the court system anyway.
-
I live overseas. Have been called several times. I usually send them a pro-forma invoice for my service, including business class air fare, consulting fee of $400/hour, 5 star hotel cost, and and offshore bank account to wire the funds in advance. They are, after all, obliged to pay for one's costs to perform the service...
I also include in the letter a few of the most politically incorrect statements of that particular year... mildly, of course.
I also include a request that if they elect to exclude me, they send a written confirmation of same to my US based attorney.
Somehow they've never followed up, but the letter usually comes a few months later.
We have found Keefe's love child.
-
I had jury duty once, kid accused of stabbing his father. There was one witness, an older lady who saw this happen from across an alley in her apartment. The thing though, it was late at night and she didn't have her glasses on! My fellow jurors were ready to convict right away, I was able to play devils advocate and stall a bit. Another part of the case hinged on a very unique knife. During my stall, and a recess, I was able to find that same knife at a local store! Can you believe it! Overall, the jurors were pretty angry to start, but in the end I believe that justice was served.
-
I've been drawn three times in less than five years. This is getting ridiculous.
I went down this morning and they told me that they were "filled up" for today, so I can "go home" and come back tomorrow morning. She very enthusiastically told me, "don't worry, you'll still get credit and paid for today and you don't have to go to work." For just a second, it made me wish I had a job where that was even remotely true. My job doesn't stop when I get jury duty. I just go downtown for the day, spend seven hours doing my civic duty, then work until midnight. The first time I got called I was really happy to have a chance to sit on a jury. It was actually interesting and great experience for me to have in my line of work. But I'm over it now. My wife has been called once -- more than 25 years ago. Hopefully after this I'll be done for another 25 years.
I had been planning to move my daughter to NYC on Friday morning...that's in jeopardy at this point.
Sorry. Rant over.
You must not live in WI as AKAIK you can only be called once every 4 years.
-
Yeah, I mean, I get that it's a pain in the ass and you physically can't do it because you live elsewhere, but it is kind of a civic duty that people have to do in our society.
-
Wear a Blue Lives Matter t shirt to the first day so that the defense weeds you out during jury selection and also so everyone knows you're a jackass
-
I had jury duty once, kid accused of stabbing his father. There was one witness, an older lady who saw this happen from across an alley in her apartment. The thing though, it was late at night and she didn't have her glasses on! My fellow jurors were ready to convict right away, I was able to play devils advocate and stall a bit. Another part of the case hinged on a very unique knife. During my stall, and a recess, I was able to find that same knife at a local store! Can you believe it! Overall, the jurors were pretty angry to start, but in the end I believe that justice was served.
So you did the job that the lawyers failed to do?
-
I had jury duty once, kid accused of stabbing his father. There was one witness, an older lady who saw this happen from across an alley in her apartment. The thing though, it was late at night and she didn't have her glasses on! My fellow jurors were ready to convict right away, I was able to play devils advocate and stall a bit. Another part of the case hinged on a very unique knife. During my stall, and a recess, I was able to find that same knife at a local store! Can you believe it! Overall, the jurors were pretty angry to start, but in the end I believe that justice was served.
Did she also incorrectly recall how long it takes to make grits?
-
I have been on jury duty twice. The first was a murder trial. Two teens were accused of murdering an owner of a convenience store. Their attorney was very inexperienced. Good thing the rules of evidence weren't closely followed, as it ended up being a case of mistaken identity. The only "witnesses" needed new glasses, and the other lost track of time.
Edit:Darnit Wags
-
My Cousin Vinny is one of those movies that I’ll turn on any time it’s on.
-
I had jury duty once, kid accused of stabbing his father. There was one witness, an older lady who saw this happen from across an alley in her apartment. The thing though, it was late at night and she didn't have her glasses on! My fellow jurors were ready to convict right away, I was able to play devils advocate and stall a bit. Another part of the case hinged on a very unique knife. During my stall, and a recess, I was able to find that same knife at a local store! Can you believe it! Overall, the jurors were pretty angry to start, but in the end I believe that justice was served.
Ok, Henry Fonda.
-
You must not live in WI as AKAIK you can only be called once every 4 years.
We can get called once every two years.
I had an interesting exchange with the guy today since I got drawn for Federal court in September 2019. On that occasion, even though my name was drawn, I never had to actually go down to the court. I had to call every afternoon for a week but they didn't ever tell me to come down. At the end of they week they said that I was done and did not have to call again. I had hoped that this would qualify as serving and that I would be excused this time.
This led to the following exchange this morning with a county employee:
Me: I was wondering if I am excused because it's been less than two years since I was drawn?
Him: When was it?
Me: September 30, 2019, I was called for Federal Court.
Him: That's more than two years ago.
Me: No it's not.
Him: Yes. That was 2019; it's 2021.
Me: September 30, 2019 is not more than two years ago.
I swear that this exchange actually occurred. Ultimately, he told me that being required to call in every day for a week doesn't qualify -- it's only if you actually have to report in person. Damn it!
-
County and federal are totally different jurisdictions. Being called for federal court I do not believe counts for any two-year limitation.
-
Got called for jury duty once in DuPage County, Illinois.
Got questioned for one trial involving a contract dispute. The defense counsel rejected me as soon as he found out I was an accountant.
When I went back into the waiting area, everyone was crowded around the TV watching the Branch Davidian compound go up in flames.
-
Got called for jury duty once in DuPage County, Illinois.
Got questioned for one trial involving a contract dispute. The defense counsel rejected me as soon as he found out I was an accountant.
When I went back into the waiting area, everyone was crowded around the TV watching the Branch Davidian compound go up in flames.
You not being on the jury vs Branch Davidian Compound results. Causality, correlation, or coincidence?
-
Connecticut has a notification system, that tells you the night before if you even need to show up. They also usually let you schedule the day you want to go in. My co-worker just scheduled the Friday before Memorial Day weekend which of course was cancelled the night before because the attorneys were off.
I was called for jury duty only once in my life. It was around 2008. They read a list a names and to raise your hand if you knew any of the people who's names were called. One of the names was the doctor who did my first knee surgery back in 1996. I was excused.
I knew a guy who got selected and he was assigned to some murder trial and was out of the office 2.5 weeks.
-
never called until 2014-slender man trial. wrote to tell them that i'd love to serve for that trial, however, due to the unpredictability of it's length, it would have severely restricted me from working/seeing patients. also, i knew the grandparents(inlaws), who are patients and the first to the hospital following the stabbing. they did let me off, but got reassigned to another week. waukesha county has a call in system. nothing came up
-
Called 3 times.
One was on a trial that got settled before we could decide.
Second , they dismissed the entire juror pool early because of no trials.
Third, I got on a grand jury where there are literally no rules and the prosecutors can generally get what they want.
-
Served on two juries.
In 2004 in Chicago, I was on a jury that awarded $21 million to a family whose daughter was accidentally poisoned due to Walgreens mis-filling a prescription.
https://chicagoist.com/2004/08/12/walgreens_ordered_to_pay_21_million.php
The defense attorney was brilliant, but he had nothing to go on. It was super interesting to be part of the process, as the 12 of us decided on the award.
A couple years ago in Charlotte, I was on a jury that found a guy guilty of pimping out and abusing a 17-year-old girl. Also an interesting trial.
It is a civic duty, but I do feel badly for those, like the OP, who are called numerous times in a short window. Doesn't seem very fair to them.
-
Wear a Blue Lives Matter t shirt to the first day so that the defense weeds you out during jury selection and also so everyone knows you're a jackass
I was a forensic scientist for the NJ State Police. To say the least I was never picked to serve on a jury. I quit after 3 years, way to depressing of a job. The straw that broke the camel's back for me was DWI/death by auto of a 5 year old boy. it was one of my first cases. This was his 7th DWI. He dragged the kid a full mile before the boys body broke away from his car. He denied hitting the boy but clothes wrapped around his drive shaft matched boys perfectly as did shard of glass from his front headlight. The glass shards fit perfectly like a puzzle. What really did it for me was that the Judge found him guilty and sentenced him to only 18 months in jail. Two years later he was up for trial before the same judge again for death by auto while DWI. I refused to take the case and quit shortly thereafter. As you can guess this was before the era of MADD.
-
Served on two juries.
In 2004 in Chicago, I was on a jury that awarded $21 million to a family whose daughter was accidentally poisoned due to Walgreens mis-filling a prescription.
https://chicagoist.com/2004/08/12/walgreens_ordered_to_pay_21_million.php
The defense attorney was brilliant, but he had nothing to go on. It was super interesting to be part of the process, as the 12 of us decided on the award.
Poor Mr. Gower, George Bailey wasn't there to save him.
-
I was a forensic scientist for the NJ State Police. To say the least I was never picked to serve on a jury. I quit after 3 years, way to depressing of a job. The straw that broke the camel's back for me was DWI/death by auto of a 5 year old boy. it was one of my first cases. This was his 7th DWI. He dragged the kid a full mile before the boys body broke away from his car. He denied hitting the boy but clothes wrapped around his drive shaft matched boys perfectly as did shard of glass from his front headlight. The glass shards fit perfectly like a puzzle. What really did it for me was that the Judge found him guilty and sentenced him to only 18 months in jail. Two years later he was up for trial before the same judge again for death by auto while DWI. I refused to take the case and quit shortly thereafter. As you can guess this was before the era of MADD.
that is absolutely nasty warrior! i love forensics and worked with st joe's pathologist while waiting for my license. your stuff might have changed my mind. stuff like that is hard to "un see"
-
I called for the first time ever, to report April 19, 2020. No complaints.
My wife got called for Grand Jury duty. That was rough!
-
Called for jury duty three times:
1) Was interrogated for jury duty in DuPage County on a shoplifting case at Sax in Oak Brook Mall. Was never seated.
2) Was seated on a Lake County, IL jury in which an African American woman was charged with battery on a Gurnee Police Officer. The cop gave conflicting testimony as to whether the incident happened at 3 a.m., or 3 p.m. The woman closed the door of her car and the police officer inserted his hand inside the door so he could retain the right to search it. The woman probably was charged with operating a motor vehicle while being African American in Central Lake County. Unanimous verdict on the second vote for acquittal. It was 11-1 the first time and 12-0 the second.
3) Was called again eight years later. Got off when I sent them a copy of my Florida voter registration.
My wife was called one month after we became Florida residents. She was seated on a drug case because she was so new, she didn't know the police, the attorneys or the judge, much less the defendant. Guy was charged with selling cocaine in front of a church (really massive penalty for doing that in Florida). He was convicted easily. Went up the river for 30 years. Was a habitual dealer and the county apparently had him on about 12 charges.
-
Served on two juries.
In 2004 in Chicago, I was on a jury that awarded $21 million to a family whose daughter was accidentally poisoned due to Walgreens mis-filling a prescription.
https://chicagoist.com/2004/08/12/walgreens_ordered_to_pay_21_million.php
The defense attorney was brilliant, but he had nothing to go on. It was super interesting to be part of the process, as the 12 of us decided on the award.
A couple years ago in Charlotte, I was on a jury that found a guy guilty of pimping out and abusing a 17-year-old girl. Also an interesting trial.
It is a civic duty, but I do feel badly for those, like the OP, who are called numerous times in a short window. Doesn't seem very fair to them.
Surprised being in media didn't get you disqualified. That was always my dad's out.
-
Surprised being in media didn't get you disqualified. That was always my dad's out.
In Illinois, they eliminated that exemption more than 25 years ago.
Only exemptions are for officers of the court and police officers.
-
I've been called four times. Once I got the college student exemption. The other three times I got weeded out the second I told them what my job was.
-
Surprised being in media didn't get you disqualified. That was always my dad's out.
I was surprised I was selected. After it was all over, I sat down with the judge because I thought I might write about the whole experience. When I told him I was surprised that an active member of the media was selected for the jury, here was his exact quote (so don't shoot the messenger):
"We like having journalists on juries, assuming all the other boxes are checked. Journalists tend to be fair. Analytical. And many of you are cynics by nature -- your attitude is, 'Prove it to me,' and that's exactly how we want a juror to think when hearing testimony. So unless a media person's actual job assignments create a conflict of interest -- for example, an athlete that a sportswriter knows is on trial for something -- being with the media is usually viewed as a positive and not a negative when choosing juries."
-
I was in a jury pool in Cook County when you had to serve a week (versus one day, one trial) with Dan Webb's mom. Her son was the US Attorney for Northern Illinois who was prosecuting Operation Greylord which was targeting all the corrupt judges. No trial would take her with a ten foot pole.
-
I was surprised I was selected. After it was all over, I sat down with the judge because I thought I might write about the whole experience. When I told him I was surprised that an active member of the media was selected for the jury, here was his exact quote (so don't shoot the messenger):
"We like having journalists on juries, assuming all the other boxes are checked. Journalists tend to be fair. Analytical. And many of you are cynics by nature -- your attitude is, 'Prove it to me,' and that's exactly how we want a juror to think when hearing testimony. So unless a media person's actual job assignments create a conflict of interest -- for example, an athlete that a sportswriter knows is on trial for something -- being with the media is usually viewed as a positive and not a negative when choosing juries."
https://news.gallup.com/poll/321116/americans-remain-distrustful-mass-media.aspx
-
https://news.gallup.com/poll/321116/americans-remain-distrustful-mass-media.aspx
I'll make sure to take your biases under advisement the next time I'm empaneling a jury. You do realize that "Americans" are not the group of people who need to trust a potential jury member during voir dire right?
-
https://news.gallup.com/poll/321116/americans-remain-distrustful-mass-media.aspx
I thought worshipers of the deposed Mad King considered polls to be "fake"? Are they only "real" if you like what's in them?
As I said, it was a direct quote from the judge. Don't shoot the messenger.
And say hi to Q for me.
-
https://news.gallup.com/poll/321116/americans-remain-distrustful-mass-media.aspx
Gratz to the right wing noise machine on their successful campaign.
-
Unnecessary partisan agenda driven link from Rocket...check
Mad King/Your hero/Your Idol reference...check
Secondary mocking of Rocket to start a chain of such responses...check
SUPERBAR THREAD JACK BINGO!!!!
-
Unnecessary partisan agenda driven link from Rocket...check
Mad King/Your hero/Your Idol reference...check
Secondary mocking of Rocket to start a chain of such responses...check
SUPERBAR THREAD JACK BINGO!!!!
Look, Wags … I was asked a legit question and I gave a legit answer. And then doQter roQket goes into his bullshyte.
Could I have taken the high road and said, “Thank you for that truly relevant poll, fine sir”? Sure, but I didn’t … and neither would you have.
-
https://news.gallup.com/poll/321116/americans-remain-distrustful-mass-media.aspx
I had jury duty last year but got out of it with wearing my MAGA hat and shirt
-
I had jury duty last year but got out of it with wearing my MAGA hat and shirt
Wasn't there a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode kinda like that?
-
Free advice: if you don't desire to sit on a jury, try to postpone your appearance to July or August. There won't be many jury trials going on so you'll be out of there in about 10 minutes.
-
This long, but outstanding, New York Times Magazine article about a Black man wrongly convicted on almost no evidence provides a chilling example of systemic racism and its effects.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/30/magazine/yutico-briley.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210630&instance_id=34188&nl=the-morning®i_id=108420427&segment_id=62115&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa
Here is a summary of the article by the NYT's David Leonhardt:
After Benjamin Joseph was robbed at gunpoint outside his New Orleans home one night almost nine years ago, he described his attacker to the police: a Black man with a slim build who was wearing a pullover hoodie, Joseph said.
Eighteen hours later, the police made a curious decision. They arrested a teenager named Yutico Briley — even though he was heavyset and wearing a zip-up hoodie — while he was walking in Joseph’s neighborhood. Briley was Black and carrying a gun, which was evidently enough for officers to consider him a suspect.
From there, the case followed a course that’s more common than it should be. The police and prosecutors moved aggressively, seeming to care more about securing a conviction than making sure they were convicting the right person.
Instead of putting together a lineup that included Briley and several other men, the police brought him — and him alone — to Joseph and asked if Briley was the robber. “It seemed really unprofessional,” Joseph would say later. It is also a common way to produce false identification, research has found. Sure enough, Joseph identified Briley as the robber.
Later, investigators failed to collect evidence that could have cleared Briley, like security-camera footage and cellphone records that would have confirmed where he was when the robbery occurred. His original lawyers failed to do so, too. By the time other lawyers tried to do it, the records had been erased.
Ultimately, a jury convicted Briley based largely on Joseph’s identification, and a judge sentenced him to 60 years in prison without the possibility of parole. He had no prior violent convictions on his record. It was a virtual life sentence for a 19-year-old convicted of a single crime on extremely thin evidence.
There are almost certainly tens of thousands of Americans who are now imprisoned for crimes they did not commit. (Several studies have suggested a nationwide wrongful conviction rate of at least 3 percent.) A disproportionate share of the wrongly convicted are Black men.
By now, you’ve probably read at least a few stories about these injustices. They can be both depressing and enraging. But I encourage you to make some time today or this week to read the story of Yutico Briley. It appears in The Times Magazine, written by my colleague Emily Bazelon. It is in many ways “crushingly ordinary,” as Emily says. But it is also different.
White man who murdered two people carries a gun in Kenosha; police wave him through and he is considered a hero to many. Black man who hurt nobody carries a gun in New Orleans; he's automatically assumed to be a felon. The systemic racism in our policing and legal system is so obvious, and yet some refuse to accept it as real.
I hope that those who do serve on juries involving these kinds of cases will stay open-minded and will demand hard evidence before convicting.
And as a member of American society, I thank the fine attorneys and the heroic journalist who worked to get this outrageous conviction overturned, and I hope Yutico Briley will make the most of his freedom.
-
Called for duty 3 times, got lucky twice on two juries.
Both trials were examples of people wasting everyone's time. --- And it's an ENORMOUS amount of wasted time. Lawyers, judges, bailiffs, jurors, hundreds of man hours wasted.
Trial 1 was to remove parental rights from a dad. There's a long process where the State sets minimal parameters to gain your kid back: No substance abuse, you need a place to live, and a job. This dad had none of that .. but damnit, he wanted his day in court, and he lost. Hundreds of hours wasted for this fartnocker.
Trial 2 was great too. A woman accused her ex-boyfriend of assault. Seemed cut and dried, young girl, big tough (black) dude, good prosecution. Except the girl was lying to get revenge for whatever and the jury saw right through it, he was not guilty, hundreds of hours wasted for this soap opera.
That being said .. I totally enjoy jury duty and would sign up every year if that was an option. I was bummed I didn't catch a case the last time.
-
This long, but outstanding, New York Times Magazine article about a Black man wrongly convicted on almost no evidence provides a chilling example of systemic racism and its effects.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/30/magazine/yutico-briley.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210630&instance_id=34188&nl=the-morning®i_id=108420427&segment_id=62115&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa
Here is a summary of the article by the NYT's David Leonhardt:
After Benjamin Joseph was robbed at gunpoint outside his New Orleans home one night almost nine years ago, he described his attacker to the police: a Black man with a slim build who was wearing a pullover hoodie, Joseph said.
Eighteen hours later, the police made a curious decision. They arrested a teenager named Yutico Briley — even though he was heavyset and wearing a zip-up hoodie — while he was walking in Joseph’s neighborhood. Briley was Black and carrying a gun, which was evidently enough for officers to consider him a suspect.
From there, the case followed a course that’s more common than it should be. The police and prosecutors moved aggressively, seeming to care more about securing a conviction than making sure they were convicting the right person.
Instead of putting together a lineup that included Briley and several other men, the police brought him — and him alone — to Joseph and asked if Briley was the robber. “It seemed really unprofessional,” Joseph would say later. It is also a common way to produce false identification, research has found. Sure enough, Joseph identified Briley as the robber.
Later, investigators failed to collect evidence that could have cleared Briley, like security-camera footage and cellphone records that would have confirmed where he was when the robbery occurred. His original lawyers failed to do so, too. By the time other lawyers tried to do it, the records had been erased.
Ultimately, a jury convicted Briley based largely on Joseph’s identification, and a judge sentenced him to 60 years in prison without the possibility of parole. He had no prior violent convictions on his record. It was a virtual life sentence for a 19-year-old convicted of a single crime on extremely thin evidence.
There are almost certainly tens of thousands of Americans who are now imprisoned for crimes they did not commit. (Several studies have suggested a nationwide wrongful conviction rate of at least 3 percent.) A disproportionate share of the wrongly convicted are Black men.
By now, you’ve probably read at least a few stories about these injustices. They can be both depressing and enraging. But I encourage you to make some time today or this week to read the story of Yutico Briley. It appears in The Times Magazine, written by my colleague Emily Bazelon. It is in many ways “crushingly ordinary,” as Emily says. But it is also different.
White man who murdered two people carries a gun in Kenosha; police wave him through and he is considered a hero to many. Black man who hurt nobody carries a gun in New Orleans; he's automatically assumed to be a felon. The systemic racism in our policing and legal system is so obvious, and yet some refuse to accept it as real.
I hope that those who do serve on juries involving these kinds of cases will stay open-minded and will demand hard evidence before convicting.
And as a member of American society, I thank the fine attorneys and the heroic journalist who worked to get this outrageous conviction overturned, and I hope Yutico Briley will make the most of his freedom.
Here's a free article:
http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=5942 (http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=5942)
The person robbed was brought down to the station to identify the offender, There was no photo array or live lineup with several men standing against a wall. Instead, B.J. remained in the car, at least 15 feet away from Briley, while officers illuminated Briley’s face with the headlights from a nearby police vehicle. B.J. said that Briley was the man who robbed him.
To me, This case is more about the incompetence of the defense counsel rather than the jury.
For example, placing p.m. instead of a.m. on the time for the subpoena of the motel video.
Also, a 6 minute closing statement basically stating its up to them to prove he did it, and they didn't..Na Na Na Na
Oh, and he was a felon who illegally was carrying a handgun. But that is a separate issue and by no means justifies this conviction (in fact it wasn't allowed in trial to mention that)
-
Here's a free article:
http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=5942 (http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=5942)
The person robbed was brought down to the station to identify the offender, There was no photo array or live lineup with several men standing against a wall. Instead, B.J. remained in the car, at least 15 feet away from Briley, while officers illuminated Briley’s face with the headlights from a nearby police vehicle. B.J. said that Briley was the man who robbed him.
To me, This case is more about the incompetence of the defense counsel rather than the jury.
For example, placing p.m. instead of a.m. on the time for the subpoena of the motel video.
Also, a 6 minute closing statement basically stating its up to them to prove he did it, and they didn't..Na Na Na Na
Oh, and he was a felon who illegally was carrying a handgun. But that is a separate issue and by no means justifies this conviction (in fact it wasn't allowed in trial to mention that)
Agree on all of that, lawdog, including Briley illegally carrying (as always an easily available) gun ... though while I wasn't in the room with the jury it's hard to believe there wasn't enough reasonable doubt to not convict.
Part of the systemic racism in our legal system is that poor folks often get overworked and/or bad lawyers.
-
With all due respect, MU82, what does the article you posted have to do with being summoned for jury duty?
-
MU82 looks for any opportunity to inject politics into a discussion.
-
I got off easy this time. As I mentioned above, I got excused when I got there Monday morning with instructions to return Tuesday morning. I returned the next morning, sat in the big room where all the prospective jurors wait, and worked. They called one panel (25 people or so) at about 11:20. After that panel was called, they told the rest of us that they wouldn't be needing any more jurors this week and sent us home about 11:45 having completed our jury service for the week. Now I'm done for the next couple years.
I think the biggest reason for this is that they are still on a very limited case load due to COVID. The county only has three court rooms that are being used for trials for 32 full-time judges and visiting judges. Typically each of those judges has their own court room and the visiting judges try cases across the street in the old courthouse. So, you go from a potential 35+ trials at any given time (which, obviously, would never happen) to a potential three trials. They just don't need many jurors right now.
Anyway, I'm pleased to have only had to spend one half day on jury duty this time.
As a litigator, I always wanted to be on a jury. I got to do that several years ago and it was a good and enlightening experience for me. However, I saw first hand why many (most?) lawyers don't want a lawyer on the jury. In my experience, a lawyer on a jury had way, way too much influence on the proceedings. Maybe that's not always the case, but it was definitely the case for me. I'm not saying that to boast, but simply reporting what I experienced. I understand it -- many people in a new and unfamiliar situation will quite naturally look to those who they perceive as more knowledgeable or experienced for guidance (either explicitly or implicitly). Honestly, I found it uncomfortable and will try to avoid actually sitting on a jury in the future if any questions in jury selection allow me to express that concern.
-
With all due respect, MU82, what does the article you posted have to do with being summoned for jury duty?
It has to do with the job of jurors. But yes, it is only kinda related. If I had it to do over again, I probably would have put it in its own thread or in the cops shooting Blacks thread.
MU82 looks for any opportunity to inject politics into a discussion.
Dear Scoop Posting Police (except when you post something that has nothing to do with the OP; then it's OK):
Eradicating systemic racism from our legal system isn't a political issue, or at least it doesn't have to be.
-
I got off easy this time. As I mentioned above, I got excused when I got there Monday morning with instructions to return Tuesday morning. I returned the next morning, sat in the big room where all the prospective jurors wait, and worked. They called one panel (25 people or so) at about 11:20. After that panel was called, they told the rest of us that they wouldn't be needing any more jurors this week and sent us home about 11:45 having completed our jury service for the week. Now I'm done for the next couple years.
I think the biggest reason for this is that they are still on a very limited case load due to COVID. The county only has three court rooms that are being used for trials for 32 full-time judges and visiting judges. Typically each of those judges has their own court room and the visiting judges try cases across the street in the old courthouse. So, you go from a potential 35+ trials at any given time (which, obviously, would never happen) to a potential three trials. They just don't need many jurors right now.
Anyway, I'm pleased to have only had to spend one half day on jury duty this time.
As a litigator, I always wanted to be on a jury. I got to do that several years ago and it was a good and enlightening experience for me. However, I saw first hand why many (most?) lawyers don't want a lawyer on the jury. In my experience, a lawyer on a jury had way, way too much influence on the proceedings. Maybe that's not always the case, but it was definitely the case for me. I'm not saying that to boast, but simply reporting what I experienced. I understand it -- many people in a new and unfamiliar situation will quite naturally look to those who they perceive as more knowledgeable or experienced for guidance (either explicitly or implicitly). Honestly, I found it uncomfortable and will try to avoid actually sitting on a jury in the future if any questions in jury selection allow me to express that concern.
Sounds like you got a good result, SAW, and I definitely understand how uncomfortable serving could make you.
-
MU82 looks for any opportunity to inject politics into a discussion.
How is that politics?
-
It has to do with the job of jurors. But yes, it is only kinda related. If I had it to do over again, I probably would have put it in its own thread or in the cops shooting Blacks thread.
Dear Scoop Posting Police (except when you post something that has nothing to do with the OP; then it's OK):
Eradicating systemic racism from our legal system isn't a political issue, or at least it doesn't have to be.
Was somebody shot?
One idea might be pour more money into public defenders salaries, to keep some of the good ones from jumping ship, or more pro bono requirements.
-
I've always wanted to participate in jury nullification on a drug case.
-
Obviously systemic racism in our legal system doesn't affect every Black person the $ame ...
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bill-cosbys-sexual-assault-conviction-is-overturned-2021-06-30/
Back home to love Jello pudding again!
-
I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that, unfortunately, this is the right call. If you give someone immunity from prosecution in exchange for their testimony, well, you've given them immunity.
The guy that gave Cosby immunity was one of Trump's clownish lawyers in his second impeachment trial. Because of course it was.
-
How is that politics?
read below-all ya had to do is...wait for it
-
read below-all ya had to do is...wait for it
huh? is that english?
-
Currently serving on a jury on an interesting case.
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=62080.0
Despite the multiple character witnesses presented for the defense, the evidence presented by prosecutors Wades and Rocky is just too compelling for me to saying anything other than "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt".
Found it interesting that the accused had the opportunity to take the stand (either through a proxy or a burner), and instead appeared to invoke their 5th amendment rights, and without that, the defense really just had deflections and argument skirting.
As for the sentencing, I will leave that up to our wonderful overlords (it's not like this is a democracy right?). Those overlords also know how to contact me so I can be compensated for my time serving on this jury, as I most definitely was not partaking in my civic duty while at work.
-
read below-all ya had to do is...wait for it
Read below what? Your post? Is Sean Connery political?
-
Read below what? Your post? Is Sean Connery political?
"Obviously systemic racism in our legal system doesn't affect every Black person the $ame ..."
provocative to say the least-
-
"Obviously systemic racism in our legal system doesn't affect every Black person the $ame ..."
provocative to say the least-
What's provocative or political about that?
-
What's provocative or political about that?
Nothing. It's easier for him to say that he disagrees with it politically rather than address or try to understand the problem.
It's political in the same way that climate change or evolution are.
-
Haven't been called in yet. But my time is coming. Fully plan to eliminate myself from consideration immediately with hot takes.
-
Haven't been called in yet. But my time is coming. Fully plan to eliminate myself from consideration immediately with hot takes.
Best course of action.
As referenced earlier...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94zkBGm1IoU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94zkBGm1IoU)
-
Haven't been called in yet. But my time is coming. Fully plan to eliminate myself from consideration immediately with hot takes.
I just don't understand people who intentionally try to get out of jury duty. Isn't that part of your responsibility as a citizen, like voting?
-
I just don't understand people who intentionally try to get out of jury duty. Isn't that part of your responsibility as a citizen, like voting?
Agree. In fact, it's a more direct exercise of democracy than voting.
-
I just don't understand people who intentionally try to get out of jury duty. Isn't that part of your responsibility as a citizen, like voting?
I liken it to taxes vs voting. It’s a personal cost that many people try to minimize.
-
Read below what? Your post? Is Sean Connery political?
"All I'm trying to do is help you understand that The Name of the Rose is merely a blip on an otherwise uninterrupted downward trajectory."
-
I just don't understand people who intentionally try to get out of jury duty. Isn't that part of your responsibility as a citizen, like voting?
There are people who would suffer financially if they had to take time to serve on a jury, especially if they got a long trial. Employers can fire somebody for serving on a jury, but there are a LOT of gig workers now -- don't work, don't eat.
I wouldn't blame those folks for trying to get out of jury duty, and I would hope the judge would be sympathetic to such a person and excuse him or her.
-
There are people who would suffer financially if they had to take time to serve on a jury, especially if they got a long trial. Employers can fire somebody for serving on a jury, but there are a LOT of gig workers now -- don't work, don't eat.
I wouldn't blame those folks for trying to get out of jury duty, and I would hope the judge would be sympathetic to such a person and excuse him or her.
I get why those people would try to avoid jury duty, but there are plenty who just don't want to do it.
-
I get why those people would try to avoid jury duty, but there are plenty who just don't want to do it.
Yes. Agree that's abdication of one's duty.
-
Because I have to go finish my shift when the day of jury duty is over, when invited I always wear my dress blues to the jury holding room. For some reason, I never get seated.
-
I just don't understand people who intentionally try to get out of jury duty. Isn't that part of your responsibility as a citizen, like voting?
To each their own. And no, I don’t think jury duty is a part of my responsibility as a citizen.
-
Well so much for the concept of having a jury of your peers….
Picking a jury once years ago, there was one guy who was so blatantly trying to get out of serving, he was clearly just making up stuff as selection went along, that if we could have made him the fifth alternate, so that he had to sit through the whole trial but wouldn’t actually be in a position to decide anything, both sides and the judge would have done so.
-
Well so much for the concept of having a jury of your peers….
Picking a jury once years ago, there was one guy who was so blatantly trying to get out of serving, he was clearly just making up stuff as selection went along, that if we could have made him the fifth alternate, so that he had to sit through the whole trial but wouldn’t actually be in a position to decide anything, both sides and the judge would have done so.
IMO, this is what should happen. I get people not wanting to serve. And I get that a lot of people have excuses. Time, family, job. They're all important.
Alternatively, what if being a juror was a job? Paid well, educated, and there could still be a pool of jurors to choose from state wide. Just a thought.
-
IMO, this is what should happen. I get people not wanting to serve. And I get that a lot of people have excuses. Time, family, job. They're all important.
Alternatively, what if being a juror was a job? Paid well, educated, and there could still be a pool of jurors to choose from state wide. Just a thought.
Would it be easier to corrupt a professional juror? Would enough people choose that as a profession? We need a lot of jurors.
I’ve been called 3 times. Once in college when I was not living where I was called and twice since where I didn’t have to even go to the courthouse. I’d almost certainly see it as a major inconvenience if I did get sit on a jury but I’d probably get over it
-
Would it be easier to corrupt a professional juror? Would enough people choose that as a profession? We need a lot of jurors.
I’ve been called 3 times. Once in college when I was not living where I was called and twice since where I didn’t have to even go to the courthouse. I’d almost certainly see it as a major inconvenience if I did get sit on a jury but I’d probably get over it
I'm pushing 40 and have gotten zero calls in my life. It would be an inconvenience for sure, and they'd probably toss me anyway.
To your other questions, I don't know. I've talked about this before but I think our entire legal/criminal system could use a serious overhaul.
-
IMO, this is what should happen. I get people not wanting to serve. And I get that a lot of people have excuses. Time, family, job. They're all important.
Alternatively, what if being a juror was a job? Paid well, educated, and there could still be a pool of jurors to choose from state wide. Just a thought.
That's what Ancient Rome did. Senators and other elites sat in judgement. The plebs had no representation or a jury of their peers. Guess who got f*cked?
-
To each their own. And no, I don’t think jury duty is a part of my responsibility as a citizen.
Keep that in mind if you are ever wrongfully accused.
-
I've never been called. Maybe I don't check my mail close enough.
-
That's what Ancient Rome did. Senators and other elites sat in judgement. The plebs had no representation or a jury of their peers. Guess who got f*cked?
Oh, so sort of like our current political environment?
Or Black people on trial facing an all White jury?
-
Oh, so sort of like our current political environment?
Or Black people on trial facing an all White jury?
You suggested that method, kin.
-
You suggested that method, kin.
I mean, you mentioned elites and senators, I suggested educated people. You know they're very different things, right?
-
I mean, you mentioned elites and senators, I suggested educated people. You know they're very different things, right?
Last time I checked, our Constitution guarantees a jury of your peers. We've added that we want juries free of bias and objective.
The woman on whose case I served as foreman got a fair and a favorable outcome because 12 impartial citizens stepped up, accepted their obligations and served. They heard the evidence, understood the law and acted in a fair and reasonable manner.
If you get 12 elites, senators or even 12 folks with bias, then you're going to get bad outcomes.
While I become upset over people who politicize the legal system and expect criminal litigation to serve political purposes, we nonetheless have the best system around. I can vouch for that personally after having been part of a hearing ion a Ukrainian court room.
-
I had jury duty once, kid accused of stabbing his father. There was one witness, an older lady who saw this happen from across an alley in her apartment. The thing though, it was late at night and she didn't have her glasses on! My fellow jurors were ready to convict right away, I was able to play devils advocate and stall a bit. Another part of the case hinged on a very unique knife. During my stall, and a recess, I was able to find that same knife at a local store! Can you believe it! Overall, the jurors were pretty angry to start, but in the end I believe that justice was served.
I still say the guy was guilty.
-
Last time I checked, our Constitution guarantees a jury of your peers. We've added that we want juries free of bias and objective.
The woman on whose case I served as foreman got a fair and a favorable outcome because 12 impartial citizens stepped up, accepted their obligations and served. They heard the evidence, understood the law and acted in a fair and reasonable manner.
If you get 12 elites, senators or even 12 folks with bias, then you're going to get bad outcomes.
While I become upset over people who politicize the legal system and expect criminal litigation to serve political purposes, we nonetheless have the best system around. I can vouch for that personally after having been part of a hearing ion a Ukrainian court room.
It's the best system at locking people up, you're right.
-
There are people who would suffer financially if they had to take time to serve on a jury, especially if they got a long trial. Employers can fire somebody for serving on a jury, but there are a LOT of gig workers now -- don't work, don't eat.
I wouldn't blame those folks for trying to get out of jury duty, and I would hope the judge would be sympathetic to such a person and excuse him or her.
Employers can pretty much do what they want, even fire someone for serving on a jury; but it is illegal to do that in every state. They don't have to pay you, but if they fire you they just opened themselves up to a law suit they can't win.
-
To each their own. And no, I don’t think jury duty is a part of my responsibility as a citizen.
It is specifically mentioned in the Constitution. A trial by jury is enshrined in the sixth amendment. It is implied therefore that being called and sitting on a jury is a responsibility.
-
It's the best system at locking people up, you're right.
Candidly, I’d rather lock people up than have the no-bail revolving courthouse door that has Chicago’ police chief so riled.
I’d rather lock people up than cut their hands off, give them a bull whipping or summary execution.
We can all point to cases where juries, judges etc., didn’t get it right. But we are trying. And, if I were ever accused, I’d sure as heck want the people who took the time to serve with me on the jury for which I served adjudicating me.
-
Candidly, I’d rather lock people up than have the no-bail revolving courthouse door that has Chicago’ police chief so riled.
I’d rather lock people up than cut their hands off, give them a bull whipping or summary execution.
We can all point to cases where juries, judges etc., didn’t get it right. But we are trying. And, if I were ever accused, I’d sure as heck want the people who took the time to serve with me on the jury for which I served adjudicating me.
Not candidly, our system is utter garbage. It locks people up and throws away the key. It destroys families and communities. The state still murders people.
It's not as great of a system as you're giving it credit for.
-
Candidly, I’d rather lock people up than have the no-bail revolving courthouse door that has Chicago’ police chief so riled.
I’d rather lock people up than cut their hands off, give them a bull whipping or summary execution.
We can all point to cases where juries, judges etc., didn’t get it right. But we are trying. And, if I were ever accused, I’d sure as heck want the people who took the time to serve with me on the jury for which I served adjudicating me.
2
I don't think we are trying all that hard. We do what's easy. Pass more laws and lock people up longer.
-
Not candidly, our system is utter garbage. It locks people up and throws away the key. It destroys families and communities. The state still murders people.
It's not as great of a system as you're giving it credit for.
The majority are. Its not an excuse for the US, but criminal justice is a mess in many developed countries.
I have a colleague who is a big proponent of the "Rule of Law Index" which is put together by the World Justice Project. I believe the US is 20th in that ranking. However, the only countries above the US that are also in the top 25 for population are Japan, Germany, and the UK. If you made it to top 10 in population, much less top 5 like the US, its only Japan.
The Nordic countries are 4 of the top 5, unsurprisingly, but Im just so hesitant to use them as metrics for many things when they collectively have the population of NY or FL.
I'm also separating policing and the actual legal/court system FWIW.