NationStates Jolt Archive

I have to report to Jury Duty tomorrow. I really don't want to be on a jury for the next week. Any suggestions as to what I should say when I get in there?

In before "prejudiced against all races".

I say just do your duty. With a smile.

You should say: "All hail big brother. I love president Bush!" Just in case anyone from the CIA or FBI is watching.;)

Nah, but seriously, just do your duty. It's not THAT big of a deal.

I, for one, can't wait to be called for my first jury duty. *waits to turn 18*

I have to report to Jury Duty tomorrow. I really don't want to be on a jury for the next week. Any suggestions as to what I should say when I get in there?

Don't say anything stupid; that should help, I guess. I got selected for jury duty sometime next month, and I'm not looking forward to it. :mad:

June is going to suck hard.

You just need to figure out how you would be biased in the case. Pretend you are a racist, republican, democrat, pacifist, who supports the war and your best frind was killed by a drunk driver. That should cover all of the bases.

Or just go, since you probably won't get chosen anyways.

Don't say anything stupid; that should help,

Really? I worked as a court reporter, I think it's something everyone gets stuck on if it's not fillers or the obituaries, and it used to bug me that the jury never asked questions. I mean, they're not all experts on the law and, even though it's explained, I always thought 'they must have some questions'.

Are they allowed to ask questions? Simple clarification of certain points.

Given it's a court case, one would think it was extra important not to care if you look stupid in the face of misunderstanding certain points.

Click Stand;13720561']You just need to figure out how you would be biased in the case. Pretend you are a racist, republican, democrat, pacifist, who supports the war and your best frind was killed by a drunk driver. That should cover all of the bases.

Or just go, since you probably won't get chosen anyways.

And don't forget to mention JURY VETO POWER.

I have to report to Jury Duty tomorrow. I really don't want to be on a jury for the next week. Any suggestions as to what I should say when I get in there?

In a calm and rational voice talk about the conspiracy behind JFK's assassination. If that fails, nod and say that your principles mandate that you serve jury duty wearing nothing but a loin cloth. This should be said in the same dead serious tone as aforementioned.

In a calm and rational voice talk about the conspiracy behind JFK's assassination. If that fails, nod and say that your principles mandate that you serve jury duty wearing nothing but a loin cloth. This should be said in the same dead serious tone as aforementioned.

What about appearing for the interview in a loin cloth?

I, for one, can't wait to be called for my first jury duty. *waits to turn 18*

When you do get called, bring a book. Hell, bring 2 (just in case).

I have to report to Jury Duty tomorrow. I really don't want to be on a jury for the next week. Any suggestions as to what I should say when I get in there?

I got picked for voir dire, and ended up being dismissed by the judge because I was aggressively looking for a new job (I was unemployed at the time due to a knee injury that had happened a few months prior, outside of work), and the judge felt that serving on a jury might hamper my chances of getting one of the jobs I was about to interview for.

And don't forget to mention JURY VETO POWER.

Better yet, remember about jury veto power but keep it to yourself and serve on the jury. The jury judges both the FACTS and the LAW. If someone broke a bad law, you have every right to refuse to convict.

It's rather easy to get off, especially early on on the written questionnaire (they vary by state):

If conservative, state that you live next to a couple of cops/are related to cops, and thus instinctively trust whatever they say.

If a liberal, bring in a pamphlet on the rights of Jury Nullification/Jury Veto Power, and quote the Zenger Trial the first chance that you get.

Or, if the case has had any mention in the press, just claim that you've read about it/seen it on Nancy Grace. Grab some donuts on your way out. And post about what worked.

I have to report to Jury Duty tomorrow. I really don't want to be on a jury for the next week. Any suggestions as to what I should say when I get in there?

Like the first few posters to the thread said: do your duty.

It wouldn't really be a "jury of their peers" if the only people who would sit on it were those with nothing better to do.

=========

I have never been called up at all, and I've been adult for 26 years. It's actually getting pretty suspicious, since I know people who've been called up again and again. That looks awfully like the selection board has "favourite" jurors, or perhaps it's biased on the basis of long term employment or property ownership. Which it reeeaaaally shouldn't be.

I was called for jury duty once but the trial was canceled a week before I had to report. It's been 11 years I haven't been called up since.

:(

Sadly, what is so dicked up about our jury system is that cases are judged by a group of 12 people too stupid to get out of Jury duty. :headbang:


We really should switch to a better system, something that involves professional Jurors...

:(

Sadly, what is so dicked up about our jury system is that cases are judged by a group of 12 people too stupid to get out of Jury duty. :headbang:


We really should switch to a better system, something that involves professional Jurors...

The system we have is good. It just needs to be tightened up and modernised - pay a living wage to Jurors, and eliminate all reasons for dismissal beyond "obvious Bias" and "predecidecision".

:(

Sadly, what is so dicked up about our jury system is that cases are judged by a group of 12 people too stupid to get out of Jury duty. :headbang:


We really should switch to a better system, something that involves professional Jurors...

^this, sort of.

We should have a half professional, half random system, that way it's still a jury of peers, and it helps stop the stupid people.

Just explain that you can tell who is guilty just by looking at them.

There really isnt much you can say aside from the big joke "My friend was murdered!" or "Stolen from!" depending on the case you'll be going to. There's a decent chance you won't be picked if there's a large turnout.

Afterall, if there's a large turnout the judge will choose a small number from the group, those not chosen are free to go. From there the defense and prosecuted will question those chosen and from there select a group from the chosen members to serve. So you may get off!

Unfortunately, it's a hassle to get chosen for jury duty, but you only have to do it once a year... if at all.. might as well just bear through it. Besides! It's a day off work! (and by law, you HAVE to be paid for that day! Or days if you're chosen and get a good long trial.)

Never know! Might get a juicy murder trial!

What's this about professional Juror's though? Isn't that effectively a panel of judges?

If you don't want to be on the jury, all you have to say is the following:

"I am a member of FIJA, and I am aware of the concept of jury nullification."

That'll get you kicked out right but quick.

I can't seem to get into jury duty... I keep answering the questions wrong.

"would you feel unbiased when listening to a case of a multiple convicted pedophile who is brought on murder charges of a 3 year old girl?"
"no, I can't say I would feel unbiased"
"how would you feel?"
"pretty angry and disgusted and homicidal"

got kicked out.

I can't seem to get into jury duty... I keep answering the questions wrong.

"would you feel unbiased when listening to a case of a multiple convicted pedophile who is brought on murder charges of a 3 year old girl?"
"no, I can't say I would feel unbiased"
"how would you feel?"
"pretty angry and disgusted and homicidal"

got kicked out.
Were you really trying to get into that jury?

I can't seem to get into jury duty... I keep answering the questions wrong.

"would you feel unbiased when listening to a case of a multiple convicted pedophile who is brought on murder charges of a 3 year old girl?"
"no, I can't say I would feel unbiased"
"how would you feel?"
"pretty angry and disgusted and homicidal"

got kicked out.

If they asked you that question, it sounds suspiciously like they didn't want you already. :confused:

If you don't want to be on the jury, all you have to say is the following:

"I am a member of FIJA, and I am aware of the concept of jury nullification."

That'll get you kicked out right but quick.

I'm planning on doing that, plus dressing like a neo-Anarchist (the getup I have is unintentional, but it so fucking works).

Nobody fucks over my plans, especially when it involves a friend's graduation party, and a chance of getting laid sometime this summer.

I'm planning on doing that, plus dressing like a neo-Anarchist (the getup I have is unintentional, but it so fucking works).

Nobody fucks over my plans, especially when it involves a friend's graduation party, and a chance of getting laid sometime this summer.
What's a neo-Anarchist? And how does one dress?

I just view it as three days of paid vacation.

I'd love to get onto a jury. I would be a huge prick to the prosecution.

What's a neo-Anarchist? And how does one dress?

The Matrix. For both. :p

The Matrix. For both. :p
*rushes off to get shades*

Meh, I'd just say that I am prejudice against all races.

If it's a Pedophile though, I'd probably keep asking for his home address....

They don't like logical, rational people, they want people who can be manipulated emotionally. So be cool, rational, logical, unflappable and completely objective.

They don't like logical, rational people, they want people who can be manipulated emotionally.
This is unfortunately true. :mad:

Ohhh, here's another one: "I am not at all persuaded by arguments about motive."

Tell them your against the death penalty and that you can tell if someone is guilty or innocent by what they wear when you first see them.

I just view it as three days of paid vacation.

Knowing is half the Battle...

Federal Court:
Federal jurors are paid $40 a day. While the majority of jury trials last less than a week, jurors can receive up to $50 a day after serving 30 days on a trial. (Employees of the federal government are paid their regular salary in lieu of this fee.) Jurors also are reimbursed for reasonable transportation expenses and parking fees. Jurors also receive a subsistence allowance covering their meals and lodging if they are required to stay overnight.

Your employer may continue your salary during all or part of your jury service, but is not required to do so. Nonetheless, the Jury Act forbids any employer from firing, intimidating, or coercing any permanent employee because of their federal jury service. You should check whether your company or employer has a policy for employees serving on jury duty.

State Court:
An employer cannot fire or discipline an employee called to jury duty in most states. Additionally, most state jury duty laws don't mandate employers to pay for time spent serving on a jury. However, some states do encourage employers to pay employees while they serve, as a good will gesture, and some mandate employers to pay for a portion of the time off in an attempt to avoid potential jurors missing jury duty.

:(

Sadly, what is so dicked up about our jury system is that cases are judged by a group of 12 people too stupid to get out of Jury duty. :headbang:


We really should switch to a better system, something that involves professional Jurors...

Yeah… we could, like, appoint them, and stuff.

Rip off all your clothes and scream "OHHHH YEAHHHHHHHHH!" before covering yourself in honey and whipped cream and assaulting the judge.

Rip off all your clothes and scream "OHHHH YEAHHHHHHHHH!" before covering yourself in honey and whipped cream and assaulting the judge.

I swear, if I end up on the jury for this case...

:p

Were you really trying to get into that jury?

No. I wasn't trying to get on a jury, I was called and they asked so I answered truthfully. I wouldn't lie in court...

I sat for another later that week. They asked me if I knew the defendant and I did, so they sent me home. No jury duty.

They don't like logical, rational people, they want people who can be manipulated emotionally. So be cool, rational, logical, unflappable and completely objective.

Yes, sadly. To get unanimity in a jury, the aim is groupthink. That's usually achieved by emotional manipulation.

Knowing is half the Battle...

Federal Court:
Federal jurors are paid $40 a day. While the majority of jury trials last less than a week, jurors can receive up to $50 a day after serving 30 days on a trial. (Employees of the federal government are paid their regular salary in lieu of this fee.) Jurors also are reimbursed for reasonable transportation expenses and parking fees. Jurors also receive a subsistence allowance covering their meals and lodging if they are required to stay overnight.

Your employer may continue your salary during all or part of your jury service, but is not required to do so.

From a quick look at the state attorney generals' sites in Australia, it seems that some awards or employment contracts require the employer to pay leave for jury duty ... and if that isn't allowed for, government pays the juror an equivalent amount to their income.

That seems right to me. A bit tricky for self-employed (need to demonstrate an average income) or zero income jury candidates (they get about $20 a day and transport costs.)

A flat rate isn't fair, high income earners who would make good jurors stand to lose a lot of money.

First, you really should go and try to participate. That would make you appreciate how hard people do try to reach the proper verdict.


Second, here's a funny story that happened when I was going through the voir dire.

The defense lawyer asked a prospective member if she had ever known any family members that had been abused by other family members. Her answer was yes, her mother had been beaten by her father.

The defense lawyer continued to ask if anyone else had been abused. The woman said no, only her mother. The lawyer asked if this was still going on. No, was the answer.

The defense lawyer asked how this woman's mother had put a stop to the beatings. The lady answered in a clear and unambiguous manner that her mother had shot him.

The court was silent for about 3 seconds then everyone laughed. The judge had to look away, but he laughed. The prosecutor almost doubled up. Everyone in the jury box giggled at least. Even the defense attorney had to smile and look away.

I'm still not sure what was funny about that answer -- it had to be the dead-pan delivery. But that woman wasn't selected for our jury...

I have never been called up at all, and I've been adult for 26 years. It's actually getting pretty suspicious, since I know people who've been called up again and again. That looks awfully like the selection board has "favourite" jurors, or perhaps it's biased on the basis of long term employment or property ownership. Which it reeeaaaally shouldn't be.

People are selected randomly. So, in the same way that if you roll a dice 6 times you might get all the numbers, but you are equally likely to get 6 6's, your number has simply never come up.

As for the OP, just do the service. It's hardly a big deal.

People are selected randomly. So, in the same way that if you roll a dice 6 times you might get all the numbers, but you are equally likely to get 6 6's, your number has simply never come up.

The lottery should be open to scrutiny, like a lottery for money is. If the attorney general can choose anyone and say "they were chosen randomly, trust me" then the principle you just layed down allows them to pick pro-conviction juries with impunity.

One way around that would be to take a person off the list of eligible jurors once they have served once, and not put them back on until every eligible juror has served once.

That would be ugly, because every jury would be entirely composed of first-timers, tending towards younger and younger jurors. It would be preferable for the process to be open to scrutiny, or to be on the basis of some verifiable random criteria like birthday (as with conscription.)

I take your point but I just don't believe it. Public servants and landowners seem to be picked far more often than casual workers and itinerants. Even if my sample was larger than the few hundred people I've known well enough to know if they've ever had jury duty, I couldn't prove a thing.

The lottery should be open to scrutiny, like a lottery for money is. If the attorney general can choose anyone and say "they were chosen randomly, trust me" then the principle you just layed down allows them to pick pro-conviction juries with impunity.

One way around that would be to take a person off the list of eligible jurors once they have served once, and not put them back on until every eligible juror has served once.

That would be ugly, because every jury would be entirely composed of first-timers, tending towards younger and younger jurors. It would be preferable for the process to be open to scrutiny, or to be on the basis of some verifiable random criteria like birthday (as with conscription.)

I take your point but I just don't believe it. Public servants and landowners seem to be picked far more often than casual workers and itinerants. Even if my sample was larger than the few hundred people I've known well enough to know if they've ever had jury duty, I couldn't prove a thing.
I'm sure the sources that names are drawn from bias the results. I figure voting rolls are the biggest contributor, but then there are driver's licenses, tax rolls, etc. People that show up in multiple places would probably have a better chance of repeat summons.

In my county, you are exempted for two years after you are called. But your mileage may vary...

Just do what I did. Vomit on the judge. If you could drink a thing of strawberry quick too, then it's twice the fun because your vomit will be bright pink.

I'm sure the sources that names are drawn from bias the results. I figure voting rolls are the biggest contributor, but then there are driver's licenses, tax rolls, etc. People that show up in multiple places would probably have a better chance of repeat summons.

In my county, you are exempted for two years after you are called. But your mileage may vary...

My experience is that a the lists don't get updated that quickly; I got a summons sent to my parents' address a year after I'd moved out, and I didn't get a summons in my new state until I'd had a lease in my name for over a year. So people who move a lot have a lower chance of getting summoned, I would think.

Go, and bring a book. Or a portable game set, you can probably find someone to play checkers with while you're waiting. It's interesting to see the whole procedure.

What about appearing for the interview in a loin cloth?

That would work too. :D

What about appearing for the interview in a loin cloth?

Even better if it's made of real loin.

-snip-

Well, I can't bring you any facts and figures to prove anything, but I can say, as someone who spends an awful lot of time in court, that the jury always seems to be made up of a decent cross section of society.

I'm sure the sources that names are drawn from bias the results. I figure voting rolls are the biggest contributor, but then there are driver's licenses, tax rolls, etc. People that show up in multiple places would probably have a better chance of repeat summons.

In my county, you are exempted for two years after you are called. But your mileage may vary...

Apparently it depends on the level of court, and how long the trial takes.
Drawing from the electoral roll (and only the electoral roll) would be a fair way here, since we have compulsory voting.

The actual method is strangely hard to find out, most of the government agencies are fairly plain and open about their policies. I might just walk into the courthouse and ask ...

Well, I can't bring you any facts and figures to prove anything, but I can say, as someone who spends an awful lot of time in court, that the jury always seems to be made up of a decent cross section of society.

What is worrying me is that the Attorney General might prefer jurors who have been on a convicting jury before ... regardless of what they look like.

Just do what I did. Vomit on the judge. If you could drink a thing of strawberry quick too, then it's twice the fun because your vomit will be bright pink.

That's how Marbury v. Madison was settled.