Jury Duty

[dano]

Just finished my jury duty and i must admit i have a different view of our legal system than before.

I was interviewed by lawyers for possible selection to 2 civil cases but both sets of lawyers rejected me. Apparently they didn't like my opinionated rants about the Law.

However, I am now of the opinion that it's not our legal system that's broken. What makes the over litigation and outrageous awards so bad are PEOPLE!
People who file ridiculous lawsuits. Jurors who ALLOW ridiculous lawsuits and who decide to award the outrageous amounts the rest of us laugh at in disgust.

The decisions jury's make as to if someone or some entity is liable, and the decision the jury makes as to the amount awarded is totally up to them. Americans make our legal system shitty! Thus WE are shitty. :eek:

[Buckyrig]

I've always said, if I were ever on trial for a crime:

If I were guilty, I'd want a jury.

If I were innocent, I'd just want a Judge deciding.

[FA]

"Jury of your peers" sounds great until you're introduced to Mary-Sue-Ellen-Jo who has worked Household at Wal-Mart for the last fifteen years.

[dano]

Yes, and I can't forget the lawyers. They are the ones who pick jury members. In that sense they know exacty the personality types they want up there.


I'm sure all the jurors are decent people but a bunch of us in the back were taking guesses on who the lawyers would take and not take and many times we were wrong. the ones that sounded fair and objective were may times rejected and people with similar events as the victim or defendant were chosen.
I think they wanted people who would SAY they'd be objective but who the lawyers knew had something to not make them so.

And as a funny social observations a lot of people would just say what they thought the lawyers wanted to hear and when pressed further on answers they couldn't elaborate or became confused. Funny how people act when confronted with 'authority'

[theflash]

ok...so what would you change? i mean seriously. we have this screwed up system and yes it allows for a LOT of stupid bullshit going on. but would you rather leave it up to the discretion of one person?

now think about that. you are accused of a crime, arrested, and brought before the judge. he's gonna decide whether you spend the next 20 years of your life getting ass raped by guys three times your size. you enter the court room and the judge happens to be the father of some chick you got caught banging in highschool. the last time this guy saw you it was your naked ass jumping out his window and he swore he'd get you. how bad would the 12 juror system look to you at that point?

sure, picking jurors is a big game, but then pretty much everything in life can be boiled down to one form of game or another if you try hard enough. lawyers get paid to get you off. if that means picking 12 sympathetic or at least not antagonistic jurors to hear your case, well that's how the game is played. yes, it allows for some level of stupidity to enter into things on occasion, but in the end i think it's better than getting your hands amputated for stealing some underwear at Wal Mart.

[Buckyrig]

I'd still trust one person who has studied law over 12 people from wherever.

There was a poll of high school students a couple of years ago where the majority said they believe that freedom of speech should be limited!!!!! :blink: :blink: :blink: :blink:

HELLLLLL NO!

[dano]

I don't have a problem with a jury system necessarily. Maybe the fix would be having unassociated parties select the jury instead of the trial lawyers? They were obviously trying to load it with people they thought they could convice or control or hedge a bet towards, instead of the truly impartial people. At least in both my panels.

Maybe if there was an outside party of lawyers or judges or whatever who weren't associated with the case or the law firms repesenting the two parties, they'd pick more generically.

[kdmelrose]

But the selection process is set up so that the opposing counsel can challenge a prospective juror. There's a system of checks and balances that, in theory, prevents one side from loading the panel.

[Buckyrig]

But the selection process is set up so that the opposing counsel can challenge a prospective juror. There's a system of checks and balances that, in theory, prevents one side from loading the panel.

In theory...

a lot of things should work better in the system.

[kdmelrose]

That's not really in theory ...

[dano]

I'm not sure what rules they have to follow. They were definitely picking people with experience or knowledge similar to the case. Maybe they have an agreement to each pick X jurors that may sympathize with their clients views.

[Buckyrig]

Can I require my jury to have at least 3 athiests?

[kdmelrose]

I'm not sure what rules they have to follow. They were definitely picking people with experience or knowledge similar to the case. Maybe they have an agreement to each pick X jurors that may sympathize with their clients views.

Sure, the defense is going to try to select jurors it thinks will be sympathetic to its client, and the prosecution is going to try to select jurors it thinks will be sympathetic to the state.

That's why, according to the rules of voir dire, each attorney can challenge a prospective juror for cause. Each side is also given a certain number of peremptory challenges, which allows them to dismiss jurors without stating a reason.

[Newt]

I am apparently good juror material. The only time I've been called for jury duty I served on two juries and was selected as an alternate in a third, but begged off of that one because I vaguely knew one of the victims.

[dano]

For example, there was a car accident case to determine liability. They excused a few reasonable impartial people who had not been in accidents and chose a poor english speaking cabbie who admitted to being in a lot of accidents himself has sued people, and a mom who's 2 yr old kid was hit by a car with significant injury and the driver settled out of court.

I guess it seems as if instead of getting an impartial, fair jury they were getting a jury of evenly mixed bias. It just seemed wierd

[Buckyrig]

I am apparently good juror material.

Because you're a malleable knucklehead.

[Newt]

So's your mom.

[Buckyrig]

So's your mom.

Did I mention I am Sicilian?

[Newt]

You also mentioned how irate the automatic association of Italian-Americans with the Mafia makes you.

Or did you mean something else?

[Buckyrig]

Why's that gotta be about the Mafia?

Why can't it just be about strong family ties?

Jesus, dude!

[Newt]

Only Sicilians love their mothers?

Go back to Syracuse, you jerk.

[Buckyrig]

Only Sicilians love their mothers?

Go back to Syracuse, you jerk.

I think 'love' has a different connotation in TN than it does in NY.

And...Syracuse?!?!?!? :huh:


Buy a map, man!

[Newt]

I won't make Mafia jokes if you won't make incest jokes.

And Syracuse is the major city of Sicily, you putz. Buy a map yourself.

[Buckyrig]

Uh...I'm from New York, dumbass.

[Newt]

Dammit, Bucky, you're just too dumb.

[Buckyrig]

I think I know where I'm from!

[Newt]

You claim to be a Sicilian. You imply that you have connections with organized crime. Therefore you can sail your greasy ass back to Sicily; we don't need your kind here.

[Buckyrig]

You imply that you have connections with organized crime.

I'm sorry...what?

[Newt]

Did I mention I am Sicilian?

This is an implication of ties with organized crime. There is no other reason for you to have mentioned this. Otherwise, it would have been no more sensible than saying, "I like waffles."

[Mike225]

It could also mean he's Sicillian...just sayin'.

[Buckyrig]

This is an implication of ties with organized crime. There is no other reason for you to have mentioned this. Otherwise, it would have been no more sensible than saying, "I like waffles."

Or it could merely imply that I am possessed of some of the attributes stereotypically associated with Sicilians ("my mother's a saint" for example...which is still me goofing around)...many of which do not involve organized crime. :blink:

[Newt]

This is the conversation Bucky was trying to set up.

SPEAKER1: I do not respect your mother.

SPEAKER2: Do you know that I am of Sicilian heritage?

SPEAKER1: Please do not have me whacked.

SPEAKER2: Do not displease me again.

[Buckyrig]

No.

[Newt]

Or it could merely imply that I am possessed of some of the attributes stereotypically associated with Sicilians ("my mother's a saint" for example...which is still me goofing around)...many of which do not involve organized crime. :blink:

I've never heard any such stereotype particularly applied to Sicilians; it's more of a generalized 'tough-guy' cliche. I don't think that there are ethnic groups that are okay with a person insulting their mothers.

[FA]

Were you even born in Sicily or are you just doing that retarded "my mother's brother's sister's aunt's dog's neighbour had a one night stand down a sicilian back alley and therefore whenever anyone asks me where I'm from I'll say "I'm an eighth sicilian" instead of just saying "I'm a yank"" thing?

[Newt]

None of us call ourselves 'Yanks'. That's just insulting.

[FA]

None of us call ourselves 'Yanks'. That's just insulting.

Oh, I'm sorry. "Monarchically challenged"

[Newt]

We prefer 'non-foreigners'.

[Lord Fejj]

"yank" is something we do, at least us men anyway. :nyah:

[theflash]

i like waffles.

[dano]

Heh! Buckrigs a Sicilian NYer who lives in the desert!

[soulsyfn]

I heard he works in the "Sanitation" business...

:eek:

[soulsyfn]

I was selected for a Jury on a Breaking and Entering case, I sat through the entire trial (9 business days - 7 hours each day) and when the Jury was sent back to deliberate I found out that I was an alternate, thanked for my service and excused.

Talk about a waste of friggin time.

As I was submitting my payment card for my time I saw the Jury leaving the Jury room and they were all pissed. Apparantly when they left the court room the defense made a deal with the prosecution.

Friggin waste...

:mad:

[Newt]

Ha! I served on two trials, for a total of five days, when I was on jury duty. Then, when I went back to work, I asked HR if there were any forms I needed to get my pay for the days I was gone. "You're not getting paid for those days," they told me.
"But you have to pay me! There are laws about this!"
"No. You work for hourly wages, and you will only get paid for hours you work. Now please leave."

I had to borrow money from my mom (the shame!) to make rent that month. Stupid job. The saddest part is, if I had just filled out my time card as though I had been there those days, HR never would have known the difference.

[dano]

In NY, the court will pay you if your job doesn't. I think it's like $40 a day.

[Newt]

All the jurors got $10 for each day of the trial. Of course, we only had a 30-minute lunchbreak, which meant everybody immediately went and spent that $10 at the pub down the block because there was no time to go home or to a fast food joint.

I'm still a little steamed about the whole experience. I know, I should have asked my employers first, but I had the idea firmly entrenched in my mind that my employer was required to pay me for time spent on jury duty. I almost ended up serving on a homicide trial- that could have been weeks or months of duty, and no getting out of it once the trial started!

[dano]

Wow! Here, they pay for your lunch if you're on a jury.

The jury waiting room had public computers with internet access, had TV on, book cases, magazine racks, vending machines, adn even a walled off lounge with tables if you didnt want to sit in the main room. It was sweet!

[Newt]

Wow. Our jury waiting room had some chairs.....and the floor was carpeted! Bonus!

[xombey]

i like waffles.
lol

[xombey]

is it true that they don't sequestor (sp) anymore?

[kdmelrose]

It's relatively rare, but jurors are still sequestered in criminal trials if the judge believes they might be influenced by the news media or other parties.