Jury duty observation

(Grant MacDonald) #21

Good for you! I call that a major success in every way!

(Katie) #22

I believe that is why we have a trial by peers in the USA–so that dumb laws are not followed/passed.

#23

And that’s what jury nullification is for (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification).

(Full Metal KETO AF) #24

@SteveTheShark thanks for that link, I had no idea that this was a thing. I was aware of the hung jury concept but this is another level of explanation that I appreciated. But usually it’s centered around doubt I thought, not a rebellious act against unjust laws. I didn’t know it is a legitimate legal move. Interesting link. :cowboy_hat_face:

(Brian) #25

I’d have a lot more respect for the jury process if the jurors were paid appropriately for the time they are expected to be present. I can assure you, the judge is well paid. The attorneys are well paid. The court staff is well paid. The pay of the jurors is an insult. And yet they try to tell us how important jurors are.

I’ve sat on a couple of trials. Most of it was a total waste of time and should never had gotten that far.

I understand the duty. I understand why it’s important. But what message do they send when they offer pittances that make minimum wage look like opulence? It’s time they got with modern times and started paying people realistically. Heck, if they actually paid a decent amount, I can’t help but think they might have people volunteering for jury duty. Imagine that…

(Deborah ) #26

You do realize that would be your tax dollars paying those jurors…?

(Brian) #27

It’s our tax dollars paying the judges. It’s our tax dollars paying for the courthouses. It’s our tax dollars paying for the staff that makes it all happen. I think it’s a little odd that we don’t think a thought about paying any of those people well. But the jurors… we think it’s just fine to screw them. Give them $10/day and bully them into donating their time with the threat of jail time if they don’t show. Fair? I think not. If it’s not going to be tax money, develop a “court costs” system to make it happen. There are ways.

(Barbara M) #28

Thank you David, I was keeping a plan in my mind that would be successful for me. Each new experience builds confidence for making great decisions.
Thank you for the kind words. KCKO.
:+1:

(Barbara M) #29

Hi John, wise observations about our US legal system. Thank you. I do view serving as a part of my citizen duty.

This one was my 3rd jury in about 20 years, some were better than others. I was not keto for the previous ones.

(Barbara M) #30

I agree and am glad to hear your thoughts.

(Barbara M) #31

Thank you Grant.

#32

It’s a civic duty, not a job. Though it might be nice if the money they gave you to cover parking and transportation expenses actually covered them.

(Jane) #33

I was having lunch with one of my Dutch colleagues and he was HORRIFIED that we had jury trials here in the US. The very idea that a common person can interpret laws and pass judgement was disturbing to him.

He kept going on and on about the “highly skilled and educated judges” that should be making those decisions. I mentioned one person was easier to bribe than panel of 12 people nobody knows. I think I offended him :laughing:

#34

I think the “affluenza” case was proof enough (among many) against leaving things solely in the hands of judges.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #35

The jury’s job is not to interpret laws, but to evaluate the evidence. They are very clear about that.

In New York, your employer is required to pay you during your jury service (either the state-mandated juror fee or your regular wage, whichever is lower), which eases the burden somewhat. It’s the waiting around that gets me. The only time I ever got called for a case, I was empaneled as the foreman (because first-picked, lol!), but we never heard the case, because the defendant took one look at us and accepted the plea bargain. Fortunately, that still counted as serving on a jury, so I was dismissed from the rest of my time, and could not be called again for a specified term of years.

(Barbara M) #36

I was actually waiting for the plea discussion in this case, which didn’t happen. Each day was interesting to see the legal process, and hear testamony

What I found hardest in Pennsylvania, we were not allowed to write anything down and had to rely on our collective memories of evidence and testimony. I sometimes forget things on my own grocery list, let alone having to remember legal jargon and paragraphs of jury instruction.

(Alec) #37

That is utterly mad. Completely barking… is that for real??? You astound me…

(Barbara M) #38

Yep, absolutely true. I ‘think’ they are concerned you may miss testamony if you are busy writing. That (no writing or note taking) instruction was the same as a previous trial I was on. Madness…

#39

I think Pennsylvania is the only state where it’s prohibited. The theory on preventing note-taking is that it’s distracting to the jurors, but studies don’t prove this out. In a bunch of states you’re expressly allowed to and in the rest it’s at the judge’s discretion. I think it’s more common that they don’t allow you to take notes on your own paper, etc., but if that’s the case they usually supply paper and pens. And you’re not allowed to remove the notes from the courthouse.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #40

That is very odd. You are supposed to be able to review the stenographic record of the testimony and the judge’s instructions as needed, so that you are all, literally, on the same page.