Have you ever done jury duty before? How was the experience? Would you do it again? I look forward to not being at work today & hopefully for a few weeks 🙏🏻
Ohhhh goodness 😅
@Mela_B 🤣😂😂
They made us watch orientation video & a bias video … than gave us a break, & this entire time we’ve all been waiting & they haven’t called not a single person, I’ve been sleeping this whole time, they literally just gave us a 2 hour break just now so I’m gonna go & try to find a Burger King cause I’m craving a whopper with cheese 😋
I was a juror on a federal case. All I know from the experience is if I'm on trial, I'd rather just choose a judge then a trial of my "peers"... People just don't have the patience or want to deliberate. Then again, it was only 1 trial...so not a large test base. I had to fight to get them to even talk about the case. Also, you're given a packet with a set of rules... No 1 cares to follow them. (Like a big one, a defendant DOES NOT have to take the stand and defend themselves and therefore should not bias you into thinking they are guilty... Yet we had 1 person just swear up and down, wouldn't budge, "they must be guilty because they didn't defend themselves", jfc, that's our RIGHTS, and it's on the prosecution to prove guilt, not defense to prove innocence), anyways, there were some other examples too... But I'm off my soap box now.
Have fun with it! It can be a good experience if can get people to actually deliberate...and if it's an actual interesting trial.
@entwine thank you for all those details! Everything you mention is really great info & 💯, when we got here there was a long line to the right of people wanting to postpone or excuse for the day, half the room is sleeping right now & people rather not be here , its about to be 5 & not one person has been called yet… I don’t want to be part of a case where I’m determining someone’s fate at all, I come from a perspective that only because something seems bad, doesn’t mean it was “bad”, and only because something seems good, doesn’t mean it is what meets the eye … (I know that some reading this will not understand this but others will) … if I happen to get any case like this I’m gonna see my way out of it … anything else I’m down for it …. And thanks again, you’re absolutely right, I feel that If someone is selected juror they must take it extremely serious, it could be them in the future or a family member & every detailed needs to be understood & no personal bias or opinion - if this may be the case with anyone there are several ways to get out of it.
How's everybody feel about the Rittenhouse decision? Justtttt kidding
@cuddlewithKyle lol I would sooo love to talk about that, & politics In general, regardless what side anyones on or I’m on , I find it genuinely interesting, but people are bound to get offended or find a reason to get offended and click on the thread just to get offended …. Maybe in the future it is possible & its allowed.
Wow so we all just got excused & all of our jury duty is complete 😒 I thought 💭 I was gonna get a case with Atleast 50 bricks ….. or Atleast come back tomorrow 😔 now I gotta work tomorrow 😒
I’ve been called for jury duty many, many times in my life but only once was picked to serve on a jury. For most of my adult life I got called about every 5 years. About 8 years ago I got permanently excused from jury duty because of a medical condition that interferes with my ability to serve.
The one time I was picked for jury duty was a complicated case, a case of road rage involving two young men plus a third older man who died of natural causes before the case went to trial. One Sunday afternoon one of the men was driving home from a softball game and a pickup truck started tailgating him. When the traffic cleared, he pulled over to the middle lane to allow the truck to pass. As they passed, “gestures were exchanged” (i.e. they gave each other the finger). The first young man pulled to the side of the highway, then the truck pulled to the side of the highway a bit of a distance ahead of him. He went to his trunk, pulled out a broken off axe handle and brandished it at the other two men who by now had gotten out of their trucks and were walking towards him. He got back into his car and, as he was pulling away, hit the other young man with his car hard enough to throw him flying out into the middle of the highway. They were both fortunate that the other guy wasn’t killed.
He claimed it was an accident caused by fear. The question: was it intentional or not?
No one on the jury believed for a minute that it was accidental. He hit the other guy squarely in the middle of the front of his car and showed no remorse at all when questioned on the stand. In fact, he got a bit hot under the collar while being questioned.
I worked in construction at the time and told my coworkers, “This is what happens when you live by the maxim ‘Don’t get mad, get even.’ “
The jury found him guilty of second degree assault (first would have been that it was completely intentional, second degree assault was that he did hit the guy). We did not think it was completely accidental but also acknowledged that the guy who was hit was not entirely innocent. It never should have happened. Probably the one who was hit will suffer the bodily consequences of that for the rest of his life. The other young man ended up getting sent to prison for a year, something that will haunt him for the rest of his life.
I wonder whatever happened to either of them? Did they learn that when you play stupid games you win stupid prizes? Or did they end up bitter, blaming the other person for their fate, instead of recognizing that both of them behaved poorly, both had a chance to avoid the situation and chose not to do it? I’ll probably never know.
I was impressed with how carefully the jurors on my panel paid attention to details, asked pertinent questions, and thought about the case - all but one of them, a young man who clearly wanted to get out of there as quickly as possible. This was not a sophisticated group of people yet they noticed significant details, like the defendant sitting there stone faced the entire time, never showing any sign of remorse. They even noticed the defendant’s father had the same demeanor, not that that mattered but they were definitely paying attention.
I noticed how it seemed that, rather than being an effort to get to the truth, it seemed the point of the process was to win. That was a bit disturbing but that is how it is structured.
Most people I know try to get out of jury duty. That means that juries end up being comprised mostly of the people who can’t get out of jury duty. It’s a flawed system but it’s the best we’ve got.
@Babichev thats a crazy story !! Soo many people In jail right now over pride / a split decision / a prideful moment / something as simple as road rage / something that In the end doesn’t matter & your freedom is taken just like that.
@cuddles_ndream Same here, friend! but I've learned my lesson enough times lol. I've been insulted and ridiculed too many times just for sharing an opinion. Oh well, maybe in the future 🤷🏽♂️
Not guilty.
@cuddlewithKyle I’m curious on what side of the fence you’re on … without delving to deep in the topic, I grew up being normalized that I was blue … than mid 20’s I decided I was independent & supported the likes of dr. Ron Paul & Bernie Sanders (1 is red 1 is independent in the guise of blue) … & I know that I won’t ever see grassroots holding office ever , so it comes down to 2 choices, & I find myself leaning wayyy more to red than I do blue (for reasons I can’t discuss), this alone may be pushing it but I’m curious on your thoughts & ideals (& thank you) my delete this after I read your response.
@cuddles_ndream you sound JUST like me. Very, very similar political journey. I also can't say too much 🤣
Wow so we all just got excused & all of our jury duty is complete
Yeah, they likely settled, that can happen a lot and at any time usually. Was looking forward to hearing the story afterwards though.
It is a bummer about going back to work...haha My current job has a special time charging code just for jury duty, kinda awesome. Lol.
Oh, and the case I was on... It was sooo hard not to laugh out loud about 90% of the time, ngl, was most difficult thing. Didn't help that, this was exactly how the main victim looked
And this was how the defendant looked
Was very uncanny.
And people are VERY biased about it when people even "look guilty", even though jurors are not supposed to be. Even like babichevs experience, how he "didn't look remorseful"... We have no idea what someone is feeling/going through. Guarantee same person that thinks that, when they see someone crying or "actually remorseful", would just say they "are faking it"... I don't understand why the jury is even aloud to see or hear anything other than whom is on the stand or closing statements. Just wayyy too many chances for bias to come in.
If, after lengthy and detailed questioning by both the prosecuting and defending lawyers, the defendant never expresses any regret whatsoever about hitting the other guy with his car and, in fact, starts getting angry while being questioned - it doesn’t look like it was an innocent accident. Any normal person who truly accidentally hit someone with their car would be pretty upset about that.
@cuddlewithKyle lol its amazing how one’s perspective changes over time, & ty for sharing! 2024 elections will be veryyy entertaining & interesting to experience & watch … I look forward to doing just that at a local bar, having beer as if I’m enjoying a sporting event lol
@entwine you're right! That’s exactly what the court clerk told us, that at times they settle / postpone / one of the parties requests more time, or sometimes a jury is not requested / needed because they found a resolution by themselves … the entire room was overjoyed … I was hoping to see something as well & Lmao @ how the victim & the defendant looked 😅😂 you bring up a good point, the chances of bias is wayyyy too high, the minute a jury gets to see how the defendant & the victim looks / background / mannerisms / lack of care & empathy perceived through someone’s eyes & own experiences, as well as many other factors ,there is very high chance for bias unless both parties remain completely anonymous, we don’t even get to hear what they sound like? How they speak just pure evidence .
There is a reason they made shows like "the voice"... Even seeing a person, whether unconscious or not, creates bias. It's been proven even with resumes, that taking out everything could possibly can discriminate against, still left with a name, and people can be bias on that. (Or shoot, even if say, someone previously worked at a company the hiring manager disliked can be used against them)
They say jurors aren't supposed to be bias, but that's how lawyers even pick the jurors, as they obviously want a peer that's on their clients side.
During the many times I was called for jury duty, I was, as I mentioned, only on a jury once. It used to be in my city that they would keep you for 4 days, now they have shortened it to two days. You get paid $12/day. My employer did not compensate for lost wages. Often we would get called for a jury panel, walk to a courtroom, sit. And then get dismissed because they settled. They thanked us and then we would go back to the jury pool room. Other times I went through the screening process where they ask questions and either choose you or dismiss you based on those questions. Once I sat in the jury pool room for four solid days and never got called for anything at all. I was learning Italian and brought my books, tapes, and headphones with me. I’d go to an unoccupied corner of the room so I could practice saying words in a low voice without bothering anyone. When I got tired of that I’d get on the floor and do some stretching. And I brought a book to read.
It’s impossible to be completely unbiased but by acknowledging our biases and trying to be aware of them we can minimize their influence.
For those who oppose the system we have, with what would you replace it or how would you improve it?
I think entwine brings up a lot of good points … & from what he’s sharing I can tell that when he served as juror he took the responsibility very serious … while others didn’t take the time to even read about defendants rights ect, he did, & he saw that not taking the stand is a right & it stops there, while others would get into the circumstantial feelings of well, “they must be guilty” … this is besides what he may think or feel… I don’t oppose the system, & I don’t think he does either ( I could be wrong, I might be biased thinking this based on what im reading) but I think he acknowledges the holes in the jury process & the chances for bias … I would improve it be trying to eliminate any possible contributing factors that would lead one to bias
I think of it as a job interview for a position, if there is no knowledge of who the person being interviewed is, as far as gender / background / name / ect ect ect, & it was purely based on credentials / credit & background check / resume … again no knowledge of race / gender / looks / ect ect ect, this will be drastically more fair (or very less unbiased)
I did it once. Possession of an Uzi submachine gun. That won't sound like much to many of the Americans reading this, but here in the UK nobody has guns, not even the terrorists. It was at the Old Bailey, which is where the most serious cases in the country are tried.
The jury was a genuine cross-section of the population. Everybody got along well and I was impressed by the maturity and common sense of the whole group. We talked about bias and nobody had any, at least not that affected the case. Overall we were a sound example of the jury system at its best.
Twice . Years apart in two differant states . Yes saw the filmstrip about “ your civic duty “. Called to a panel introduced myself answered questions was dismissed , recalled , finally served on cases . Both were personal injury cases . One dude was suing a flea market he tripped in the parking lot we didn’t give him squat. We decided that he should have looked where he was going . The other was a young driver ran a red light and t- boned an SUV with two dentists husband and wife . They were uninjured except “ traumatized” by the accident . Their suv flipped over and was totaled . They felt depressed and went to a psychologist who diagnosed PTSD and prescribed a trip to Europe to take their mind off the accident and interior decorating , to brighten up their envioronment . They were seeking compensation for lost wages and the costs of the vacation and decorating . 250k Their attorney put together quite a case . Exhibits included tax returns of the dentists , plane fare and hotel and travel expenses , costs for painting and decorating their home , fancy window draperies and thing like that . One psychologist witness . The defendants lawyer produced his own psychologist to refute the others findings , and conclusions . We awarded 20k .
My observations : if you are either plaintiff or defendent, all you need better representation then the other , but you won’t know until your in court . If you are a defendent .., ham it up a little , put on the “ I’m just a poor person forced to spend money on defense”...limp in with a cane or better ... hobble in with crutches , ( What ? The nerve of them suing her !) lol
& I don’t think he does either ( I could be wrong
I believe when I said "I'd prefer just taking a judge then a jury of my peers" can come across that I have qualms with the system... But, it's less about the system and more just the general average population, and it seeming like serving your government is a burden and hassle.
The jury was a genuine cross-section of the population. Everybody got along well and I was impressed by the maturity and common sense of the whole group.
Like I mention, my sample size is limited to 1 (and movies/TV), so, it's great to hear when there are good jury's.
acknowledging our biases and trying to be aware of them we can minimize their influence.
Yes, yes, and yes... That's the big thing. This pretending like bias doesn't exist or it's possible to be "un-biased" coughnews reporterscough is a big issue. It's about acknowledging it is there, then being able to see if it is affecting and outcome/decision. Which I'm not saying the entire system does that, that's the point of the lawyers asking questions to potential jurors, to see if they have bias (and whether or not they want to use it for their advantage, if the other lawyers don't notice it)...and the judge does ask if you think you can't control your bias in decision making. So at least the goods ones accept it.
what would you replace it or how would you improve it?
The only thing I think that could be improved with the system, is better education on what it means and the idea of the judicial system... Then maybe so many peeps wouldn't hate on it or be burdened... It's likely only that way because they don't understand it.
The judge did give us instruction packet, but like I said, not many people followed it. And he did say we were allowed to send notes with questions to him, but of the 4 questions I sent, he answered 0 of them. "It's in the packet", he stated. And I just facepalm, and was like...yesss, I get that, but apparently we need clarification...
As another example, it's stated something close to like, "human memory is not reliable, or at least taken as fact [BOLD: especially of those such as policeman, ect.]" Yet, when a policeman gave his statement, about things that happened (from memory), people took it as fact and wouldn't even question it. Side rant: Know how many times I order burgers WITHOUT onions, yet I still get them with it on (even one time I ordered a sandwich "with extra lettuce" and instead got extra onions)...and even other first hand examples of my own memory definitely not reliable...
All in all, I really enjoyed the experience of being a juror and think everyone should try it at least once (as in if you're summoned, try not to be one of the other 80 people in the room coming up with funny/silly excuses...I can start another topic on this alone, lots of great ones. ) While I hope no one has to experience the judicial system on the wrong side, it's helpful to get an "inside" look at how it works.
My apologies, this is a fun topic and could talk all day... Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.
@cuddles_ndream Cool 😎I have served 2 times on Jury Duty and loved it!
@SuperManCuddles i came close , this is the 1 time I wanted to do it but everyone got dismissed, the 2 other times I was required to go the 2 lawyers on both sides interviewed me & I found my way out of them each time because I didn’t want to do it lol, I’m glad you enjoyed your experience 😄
Nice to hear @SuperManCuddles !
@cuddles_ndream Maybe next time! and @entwine Thank you very much! I enjoyed the experience and look forward to next time if selected.
