Jury duty

[seaboy4hire]

Lord I am a freak! I'm actually excited that I'm about to head downtown and report for jury duty. Two things though. I know I might not be picked for a case and I am an alternate jury. But regardless the potential power to possibly change someone's life for the better, awesome!

 

Hugs,

Greg

[seaboy4hire]

Oh and yes I am aware of jury nullification and plan on using it.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[AdamSmith]

Oh and yes I am aware of jury nullification and plan on using it.

 

Hugs,

Greg

Before you've even heard the case?

[seaboy4hire]

Before you've even heard the case?

I'm going in with an open mind. But, I know that sometimes the punishment is way too harsh for the crime.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[maninsoma]

If you've already decided how you would vote before you've even been selected as a juror, then you should explain to the judge that regardless of the facts of the case you will vote "not guilty." That way the judge can excuse you from serving. Just to clarify, however, are you saying that you believe no one should ever be found guilty of any crime, regardless of the crime and regardless of the evidence?

[seaboy4hire]

If you've already decided how you would vote before you've even been selected as a juror, then you should explain to the judge that regardless of the facts of the case you will vote "not guilty." That way the judge can excuse you from serving. Just to clarify, however, are you saying that you believe no one should ever be found guilty of any crime, regardless of the crime and regardless of the evidence?

 

If I get a case I don't know how I'll vote. Give me the evidence and the potential punishment and then I'll decide.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[Rudynate]

Usually attorneys aren't selected for juries, but in spite of this, I was very close to being selected for a jury in a dog bite case. I was really beginning to think I was going to end up on this jury. Thus judge was just not excusing people who had a reason for not serving. Dog bite cases in San Francisco are interesting because people in SF LOVE their dogs. And everybody remembers the Diane Whipple case in 2001, when two big dogs attacked a woman as she was entering her apartment in Pacific Heights and killed her.

 

I was looking at the plaintiff and I was thinking, "If the defense is smart, they will settle." The plaintiff was an exquisitely beautiful young Indian woman. She looked about as delicate and fragile as a snowflake. And of course , there was the shadow of the Diane Whipple case. Sure enough, there was flurry of activity in the court room when the defense team came in, the judge excused herself and went into her chambers with the lawyers for a half hour or so. I was the very next candidate to be interviewed during voir dire. She came out with a big smile on her face and said, "We have a settlement. The jury is excused. Thank you for your service."

[mike carey]

When I was a member of the defence force I was exempt from jury duty. Now I've retired I don't know how I will approach it. Thankfully we don't have the death penalty test, where people have to agree to the principle of applying the death penalty, as part of jury selection here.

[mattr]

I was on a civil jury for a racial discrimination in housing. It was a mixed race couple (she was white/he was black) trying to rent an apartment that was owned by an old white man who did not want a black person living in one of his apartments. It was really interesting and after we reached a verdict and compensation for the couple who was discriminated against, the judge came back to the jury room and talked to us for about an hour. He was very cool and asked what our rational was for the verdict/compensation. We had decided that we didn't want to ruin this old man's life and that he would never change his beliefs but we also could not let discrimination go unchallenged. The amount we settled on provided the couple with enough money for a down payment on a modest house in our area without badly impacting the old man's life. The judge was really interested because he had encouraged a settlement for almost exactly the compensation we awarded and his rational was the same as ours

[YoungAD]

Oh and yes I am aware of jury nullification and plan on using it.

 

Hugs,

Greg

 

Before you've even heard the case?

 

I'm going in with an open mind. But, I know that sometimes the punishment is way too harsh for the crime.

 

Hugs,

Greg

 

If you've already decided how you would vote before you've even been selected as a juror, then you should explain to the judge that regardless of the facts of the case you will vote "not guilty." That way the judge can excuse you from serving. Just to clarify, however, are you saying that you believe no one should ever be found guilty of any crime, regardless of the crime and regardless of the evidence?

 

If I get a case I don't know how I'll vote. Give me the evidence and the potential punishment and then I'll decide.

 

Hugs,

Greg

 

I too am a little confused about what you are saying here. If you are unable to be impartial, you should say so and not waste the court's time. This is not a personal attack, but you seem to be predisposed to an opinion before the case has been heard.

[+ Charlie]

Sorry, but you don't get to examine the evidence before you are chosen for the jury. If there are certain crimes or punishments for which you already know how you will vote, you should make that clear to the judge during the jury selection process.

[Tonyko]

I LOVED it! I escaped/deferred/got excused SO many times here in NYC that when I finally got a MUST SERVE notice years ago it was for GRAND Jury duty TWO weeks every day. I was dreading it, but actually found it THRILLING, esp since you're not hearing ONE case but DOZENS sometimes 9-10 a day with follow-ups as new evidence comes in for some of them etc. (they let me pick the "reminder" phrase we gave each case so if more evidence came in days later the DA would give us the phrase to remind us which case it was. Like a guy ripped off by a hotel hooker who stole his Rolex by hiding it in her Vagina etc. (when they left us I said it would've been funny if his IPAD was also missing) That case was "Pussy Watch" I LIKED the fact I was NOT deciding someone's fate, I was just deciding whether there was enough evidence for a JURY to decide their fate. Dark side? Watching surveilance vids of women and young girls being attacked in elevators and hallways, gang shootings up in The Bronx, shit that made it hard to get out of your head that night in bed. I made mental notes so I could follow later in the papers to see the outcomes. *ps, Pussy Watch hooker was later arrested AGAIN, diff guy diff hotel same thing lol.

[whipped guy]

I know someone who works for the State's Attorny's Office. Knowing what I did for a living and that it would be difficult if I were chosen for a case he assured me that I would never be called for jury duty. That was 30 years ago and so far it has proven to be the case.

 

That negated my original plan which was to appear with a god-awful tattoo on my forehead... faux of course!

 

http://www.tattoobite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/f-u-forehead-tattoo-design.jpeg

[Guest]

Well, I have some serious issues with the way in which trials are conducted in the US. I have a huge problem, for example, with the instruction that jurors are not supposed to get information pertaining to the case outside the trial. For example, my father was once in a jury in which evidence was presented on both sides as to how fast it was safe it was to take a particular curve. Witnesses on one side said X mph, and on the other side said Y mph. The judge told the jurors that they were NOT to drive on that curve to find out for themselves!! I find this utterly unacceptable as a scientist. I feel that if one is presented with alternate versions of the truth, that it should be not only the juror's option, but his OBLIGATION to research the facts independently. Explaining this to the judge usually gets me excused. I will have a chance to test this again soon, for I'm up in 3 weeks. And if I get put on the jury anyways, I'm just going to vote against the majority. And, no, I won't tell that to the judge. If they waste my time, I'll waste theirs.

[+ FreshFluff]

Well, I have some serious issues with the way in which trials are conducted in the US. I have a huge problem, for example, with the instruction that jurors are not supposed to get information pertaining to the case outside the trial. For example, my father was once in a jury in which evidence was presented on both sides as to how fast it was safe it was to take a particular curve. Witnesses on one side said X mph, and on the other side said Y mph. The judge told the jurors that they were NOT to drive on that curve to find out for themselves!! I find this utterly unacceptable as a scientist. I feel that if one is presented with alternate versions of the truth, that it should be not only the juror's option, but his OBLIGATION to research the facts independently.

 

The problem with jury experiments is that neither side gets an opportunity to cross-examine or respond to the jurors who conducted them. To take your example, if the results of the experiment benefited the plaintiff, the defense would want to ask about whether weather, changes in the road since the time of the original incident, traffic, and other conditions that affect road safety.

[seaboy4hire]

The famles lawyers dress suit clashes with her shoes. I'm all like oh no girl! No no no!!!!! But we aren't supposed to talk to the lawyers or clients.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[BabyBoomer]

Greg, are they still going thru the jury selection process or have you actually been seated as a juror?

 

~ Boomer ~

[+ Gar1eth]

I was on a petty jury once. The kinds of cases in this court were people speeding, keeping chickens, stealing electricity, and the like. I was placed on a speeding ticket trial. I think the defending attorney told us that if we thought the defendant was speeding, but didn't believe the defendant was speeding at the exact speed as designated in the complaint, we had to vote not guilty. We as laymen and women thought that was crazy whether that was the actual law or not. So we voted the defendant guilty. But I don't think we fined him/her too much. Of course there were court/attorney fees as well.

 

Gman

[seaboy4hire]

Greg, are they still going thru the jury selection process or have you actually been seated as a juror?

 

~ Boomer ~

I'm on a case.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[Guest]

The problem with jury experiments is that neither side gets an opportunity to cross-examine or respond to the jurors who conducted them. To take your example, if the results of the experiment benefited the plaintiff, the defense would want to ask about whether weather, changes in the road since the time of the original incident, traffic, and other conditions that affect road safety.

 

Now that's just silly. Driving on a curve is not an experiment, although I suppose one could call it research (or fact-finding). The weather, traffic, and other conditions should have been presented at the trial if those were relevant. Experiments provide insight into cause-and-effect by demonstrating what outcome occurs when a particular factor is manipulated. Since no particular factor is manipulated, I don't see this as an experiment. I don't think I would be doing experiments in most cases, but I would feel obliged to do fact-finding to the extent possible if I'm presented with various "versions" of "the truth."

[+ azdr0710]

I'm on a case.

 

though he has already made up his mind, Greg has asked me to inform the board that he will not be checking in here until the case is concluded....

 

just kidding!!

[seaboy4hire]

It should had been a case for traffic court. The plaintiff was a passenger in a car his gf was driving when the car got hit. He was sueing her and the driver who hit them. We found both defendants guilty.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[+ azdr0710]

why did the bf sue his driver gf?....wasn't it the other driver who was at fault for hitting the car they were both in?

[seaboy4hire]

why did the bf sue his driver gf?....wasn't it the other driver who was at fault for hitting the car they were both in?

Both drivers were at fault. She made a turn over double yellow lines. The other driver made no attempt to brake or swerve when he hit her. According to both they didn't see each other even though there were no other cars and it was middle of summer at 8pm, its still quite bright out.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[+ FreshFluff]

Now that's just silly. Driving on a curve is not an experiment, although I suppose one could call it research (or fact-finding). The weather, traffic, and other conditions should have been presented at the trial if those were relevant. Experiments provide insight into cause-and-effect by demonstrating what outcome occurs when a particular factor is manipulated/ Since no particular factor is manipulated, I don't see this as an experiment. I don't think I would be do experiments in most cases, but I would feel obliged to do fact-finding to the extent possible if I'm presented with various "versions" of "the truth."

 

"Juror experiment" is the legal term for any attempt jurors make to simulate some aspect of the case in order to confirm or reject some theory. They're not true experiments with hypotheses, manipulated variables, and random assignment to experimental and control conditions.

 

Even if weather and traffic conditions were presented at the trial, jurors may not necessarily conduct the "experiment" under those same conditions.