another jury duty summons

[Dreamstalker]

The first time I got called I had just turned 18 and was still in high school (I thought they couldn't summon fulltime students). For some reason the only out they would accept was my mom contacting them. In addition to the hardships for me (financial, although my manager at the time was willing to find some way to pay me if I did need to go), it was in a town about 1.5 hours away so mom would have had to take time off work to drive me.

The only other time (relatively close by and I was unemployed at the time anyway), the trial was cancelled before I could respond.

Nothing since...mom says that since I did take some CJ courses as part of my certificate that disqualifies me on the basis of having some sort of legal experience.

[Andara Bledin]

Nothing since...mom says that since I did take some CJ courses as part of my certificate that disqualifies me on the basis of having some sort of legal experience.

I took two years of criminal law classes in prep for becoming a court reporter; that doesn't seem to do much to stop them from sending me notices or my nearly being on a jury.

[MadMike]

Nope, wouldn't happen. In addition to the 12 jurors, they also pick 5 alternates. Which is more about discarding everybody else other than the 17 they keep. Either way, they can lose up to 5 different jurors without endangering the trial.

Interesting. I did not know that. Still, it was just plain stupid of them to pick a woman who could go into labor at any time.

[s_stabeler]

I've only been called for jury duty once. I tried every excuse I could think of to try and get out of it--saying that I hate lawyers, that I cannot be fair or impartial, etc. to no avail.

next time, look at the defendant and say "yep, he's guilty"- I'm pretyt sure that's enough for being eliminated "for cause" (which a lawyer has unlimited ability to do. What's limited is eliminations for no reason- more or less, because a lawyer doesn't like the look of you compared to what's most advantageous to him. elimination for cause is basically if the lawyer can prove you'd be biased)

[Andara Bledin]

next time, look at the defendant and say "yep, he's guilty"- I'm pretyt sure that's enough for being eliminated "for cause" (which a lawyer has unlimited ability to do. What's limited is eliminations for no reason- more or less, because a lawyer doesn't like the look of you compared to what's most advantageous to him. elimination for cause is basically if the lawyer can prove you'd be biased)

Actually, the judge will take you aside and do his best to determine if you're really and truly of that opinion, or if you're trying to get out of possibly serving on the jury. Also, I think it might be an offense to lie about such things, though I'm not entirely certain on that. I do know that he had private conversations with two different people, one of which he excused, and the other of which he forced to stay through the process.

It was actually quite interesting sitting up in that box of potentials and watching the system run its course. Like I said, it's pretty obvious the ones that'll be let go immediately: wearing a t-shirt supporting the local police or similar seems to be a good indicator (particularly as the rules state no message shirts at all). Being a casual bigot will do the same. Having a relative or yourself having been in a similar situation can also get you discarded.

Ultimately, it's up to the attorneys to decide who stays (with the judge having the option to turf people, as well). Unless you've got an obvious bias that one of them thinks will hurt his side, or you're really good at lying about the same, you've got a good chance to be stuck.

The group I was in had just over 30 people in it, so about half stayed and half were dismissed. It starts off with everybody filling out forms and then doing a one by one account of who they are, what they do, and a few other generic details.

The attorneys take turns asking questions and sending people away for cause, and about halfway, have a private session with the judge to pick 3 each that they get to drop just without cause. The last drops take the longest because that's when they cull all of the most difficult choices.

All in all, I sat down in the main room at 9am, the group of us who were chosen from all attendees made our way up to the courtroom and got started with that by about 10, and the jury and alternates were all settled shortly after we returned from lunch, which lasted about an hour, if I recall correctly. Also, we were instructed not to converse while on the lunch break to not influence one another until the jury was set.

[KabeRinnaul]

Having a relative or yourself having been in a similar situation can also get you discarded.

Yeah. I got out of jury duty on a class action suit against Philip Morris by pointing out that emphysema from smoking cigarettes was a major factor in my father's death.

[Rageaholic]

Also, I think it might be an offense to lie about such things, though I'm not entirely certain on that. I do know that he had private conversations with two different people, one of which he excused, and the other of which he forced to stay through the process.

Yeah, the contempt of court crap (which to me seems like judges just finding reasons to fine or jail people).

[Andara Bledin]

Yeah, the contempt of court crap (which to me seems like judges just finding reasons to fine or jail people).

Oh? Do you think that anybody should be able to do whatever they want in court, so long as it's not actually breaking laws, and not face any consequences?

[Tama]

I find it potentially hilarious that if you yell and scream at the judge he can point at you and say, "You owe me $500."

Or something to that effect.

[TheHuckster]

I find it potentially hilarious that if you yell and scream at the judge he can point at you and say, "You owe me $500."

If you allowed anyone to speak out of turn, become belligerent, and be obstructive to the judicial process, then our courts would become chaotic and resemble the typical pundit debate on cable news.

The whole reason a judge even exists is because two people disagree on a certain topic, whether it's something trivial like settling a minor debt or a major issue like whether someone murdered another. You simply need order in the courthouse and an organized procedure in order for the judge to come to any kind of reasonable decision, which in the vast majority of times is going to be disagreed to by one of the litigants, hence why any kind of outburst is prohibited.

[Cia]

Had jury duty again in October and almost made if through the whole month w/o my panel being called in - got called in the last week of the month. They had called in 4 panels since it was for a child rape case and expected to lose a lot of people. Which they did, a quarter of the people had problems with it and left. Me, not so lucky. This was the 7th time I've been received a summons for jury duty and the second time I've had to sit on a jury. I got out of 3 summons by going to school on the other side of the state, living out of the state and having served within two years.

In South Dakota they pull from voter registration and driver's licenses. In my county you serve for a month, in the county my brother lives in it's six months.

[s_stabeler]

If you allowed anyone to speak out of turn, become belligerent, and be obstructive to the judicial process, then our courts would become chaotic and resemble the typical pundit debate on cable news.

The whole reason a judge even exists is because two people disagree on a certain topic, whether it's something trivial like settling a minor debt or a major issue like whether someone murdered another. You simply need order in the courthouse and an organized procedure in order for the judge to come to any kind of reasonable decision, which in the vast majority of times is going to be disagreed to by one of the litigants, hence why any kind of outburst is prohibited.

it depends- Contempt of Court CAN be abused, and I DO believe that it probably needs some reform ( I don't think the judge should be able to more or less say "I think you are in contempt of court, so you are" ) but it's true the court needs a way to avoid people making court cases ridiculous. ( for example, the old trick of filing motions just to spin a case out as long as possible should probably count as Contempt of Court, since the idea is usually to force the other side to settle when you are in the wrong. It's also an argument for loser pays both side's attorney's fees, like in the UK, but that's another matter altogether)

[Rageaholic]

^

S_Stabeler exactly. Years back, there was a story about a judge who jailed a man for refusing to say the pledge. There are also those who don't like the clothes someone is wearing and accuse them of being in contempt. It's just one of those vague laws that power tripping judges can use to punish people.