Jury Selection

[axisdenied]

I'm being called into the courthouse for jury selection tomorrow. What can I say to avoid being selected? All responses welcome!

 

Thanks,

A

[Asafan]

Pick me! Pick me! I can spot guilty people like that! *snaps fingers*

[chryssy83]

If you don't tell the truth you will be lying under oath.

 

I guess you could start by saying that you would be willing to lie to the court to get out of jury duty because you don't have respect for the legal system. Just a thought...

[axisdenied]

Who said anything about not telling the truth? some of us don't want to be coerced into passing judgement on others. Just a thought.

[Woggle]

Show up dressed like a slob and don't bathe. Make sure to come across as an irresponsible person that neither side would want on the jury.

[Trialbyfire]

Don't forget the bottle in the paper bag, for breaktime...

[chryssy83]

Who said anything about not telling the truth? some of us don't want to be coerced into passing judgement on others. Just a thought.

 

I'm sure it's a deep sense of morality that caused the OP to ask this! Who would you prefer to see passing judgment on others, axisdenied?? Government officials? Most people just want out because they don't want to miss work/family obligations, etc.

 

I could tell you what to say to stay off a jury in an instant. If you're super gutsy you can probably come up with a sure-fire way on your own.

 

If you were on trial, would you want yourself as a juror?

 

If the OP wanted ways to tell the truth, some factual information might have helped others advise him/her. As it currently stands, they appear to have been looking for an easy way out whether it corresponded with reality or not.

[Erik]

According to Grisham, if you say you don't feel like you are able to judge fairly and dispassionately, you are excused. It would depend on what kind of case it is.

 

They had a lot of problems assembling the jury for the Libby-trial, everybody said they didn't believe they could ever come to other conclusions than the Bush administration were liars to a man.

[chryssy83]

axis, I just realized you are the OP. Sorry.

 

Eric's advice is actually pretty right-on. Just say you can't be impartial no matter what. Again, though, if that's not true it's not very respectable.

[climbergirl]

At the end of two weeks, we were the last group to go in for jury selection---and this meant that our time there was extended.

 

I burst into the office and said that I was going through a divorce.

 

They let me go.

 

AND I was telling the truth.

 

One woman in my group got out by letting the courts know that she was breast feeding her two month old baby.

[amerikajin]

Well, I guess I'll be the lone dissenter and tell you that I think you have a civic responsibility to be a juror, unless there is a compelling reason you can't do it. If you're living paycheck to paycheck, and it might cut into your time at work and hurt you financially, that's understandable, but generally, I think each person should do it, if asked. It's one of the most important responsibilities we have.

[climbergirl]

Well, I guess I'll be the lone dissenter and tell you that I think you have a civic responsibility to be a juror, unless there is a compelling reason you can't do it. If you're living paycheck to paycheck, and it might cut into your time at work and hurt you financially, that's understandable, but generally, I think each person should do it, if asked. It's one of the most important responsibilities we have.

 

I happen to agree. If you want to vote, expect to have other responsibilites as a citizen.

 

However, they do dismiss you if they can see a hardship. And they can check.

 

Don't most places of employment cover jury duty?

[amerikajin]

I happen to agree. If you want to vote, expect to have other responsibilites as a citizen.

 

However, they do dismiss you if they can see a hardship. And they can check.

 

Don't most places of employment cover jury duty?

 

I think the jury pays you a set amount (often lower than the amount a person gets paid at their jobs in a given day). A lot of employers will cover jury duty for a few days, but the terms depend on the individual company policy.

 

Even so, I think there is a fundamental responsibility we all have to perform on juries. Personally, I think the criminal justice sytem - especially with regard to juries - is in need of some overhaul. I don't believe in a jury of common peers, but seeing as this is the system, I think a person has a moral duty to perform their duty as well as possible. There are a lot of people who are in prison now for crimes they did not commit. Nine out of ten times, they probably get the right guy - but what about the one in ten who get fooked by the system?

 

No, OP, you have a responsibility to attend jury duty, and to faithfully execute your duties to the extent possible. Don't skip out (booooooo)

 

edited to add: I've yet to be asked for jury duty....probably because I'm a prosecutor's worst nightmare: someone who actually asks questions and thinks critically.

[climbergirl]

I think the jury pays you a set amount (often lower than the amount a person gets paid at their jobs in a given day). A lot of employers will cover jury duty for a few days, but the terms depend on the individual company policy.

 

Even so, I think there is a fundamental responsibility we all have to perform on juries. Personally, I think the criminal justice sytem - especially with regard to juries - is in need of some overhaul. I don't believe in a jury of common peers, but seeing as this is the system, I think a person has a moral duty to perform their duty as well as possible. There are a lot of people who are in prison now for crimes they did not commit. Nine out of ten times, they probably get the right guy - but what about the one in ten who get fooked by the system?

 

No, OP, you have a responsibility to attend jury duty, and to faithfully execute your duties to the extent possible. Don't skip out (booooooo)

 

edited to add: I've yet to be asked for jury duty....probably because I'm a prosecutor's worst nightmare: someone who actually asks questions and thinks critically.

 

Here, jury duty paid 5$ a day. I thought place of employment used that as paid time off.

[Jinxx]

Show up dressed like a slob and don't bathe. Make sure to come across as an irresponsible person that neither side would want on the jury.

 

That doesn't help. The one time I had to go to jury duty, the skankiest and most disgusting person in the room stood up and tried to get out of it. That person got picked.

 

My adivce -- just be honest and hope for the best. They might let you off if you are head of household and the company you work for doesn't pay for jury service.

[amerikajin]

Here, jury duty paid 5$ a day. I thought place of employment used that as paid time off.

 

Again, I think it depends on the circumstances, the company policy, and the state laws.

 

When I was operating a small business a few years ago, my assistant had jury duty for two days. We just gave her paid time off. If it had been a long trial, like a murder trial or something along those lines, it might have dragged out a week or two, in which case there might be some debate about compensation. I don't think it's automatic that a company pays you, although laws in some states may have some say over that and, of course, the company policy may offer to pay. It depends.

[chryssy83]

edited to add: I've yet to be asked for jury duty....probably because I'm a prosecutor's worst nightmare: someone who actually asks questions and thinks critically.

 

Awwww.....snap! I just have to stick up for prosecutors here when I say that they have an ethical duty not to prosecute people they don't believe are guilty. Like you said, the people prosecuted in criminal cases usually are (much more than 90%, I would bet). ANYWAY, most prosecutors are good people who want justice and are doing their jobs.

 

BUT, I will tell you that I agree with you about the moral duty/obligation. That's where I was going with my earlier posts. When I am in court, I want my jury to think critically and ask questions. I hate to think of who would be left if everyone with jobs and other stuff going on during the day was unwilling/uninterested to serve.

 

BTW--I've never seen a judge let someone off b/c of breast-feeding or the fact they are going through a divorce (unless those are part of the central issus of the case). Most of the judges I know are pretty hardcore about this stuff.

[amerikajin]

Awwww.....snap! I just have to stick up for prosecutors here when I say that they have an ethical duty not to prosecute people they don't believe are guilty. Like you said, the people prosecuted in criminal cases usually are (much more than 90%, I would bet). ANYWAY, most prosecutors are good people who want justice and are doing their jobs.

 

Okay, maybe 95 percent:p One in twenty. Not bad, but what about the 5 percent who are sitting in jail for crimes that they did not commit?

 

Come on...you know that a lot of people are simply guilty of having crap defense counsel. You must be aware of the fact that a lot of district attorneys are elected, right? You don't think this has an effect on how they conduct the law? You realize a lot of judges are also elected, right? Much the same. I think judges and attorneys should be appointed, not elected. I have traditionally had greater faith in the federal system and state systems that follow the federal model than those that embrace democracy (yes, I'm an elitist of sorts )

 

BUT, I will tell you that I agree with you about the moral duty/obligation. That's where I was going with my earlier posts. When I am in court, I want my jury to think critically and ask questions. I hate to think of who would be left if everyone with jobs and other stuff going on during the day was unwilling/uninterested to serve.

 

The OP is, quite frankly, why I have great issues with the wonderful institution of a trial by the jury of our peers:rolleyes: - for one thing that's a system that's, well, what, anywhere from 1,000 to 1,500 years old? Goes back to the days of wer geld. As impractical and unpopular as it would be to implement, I know that if I stood accused of a crime I know I did not commit, I would feel better being judged by a panel of educated and professionally trained jurors. I would also have greater confidence that guilty verdicts were, in fact, being applied to guilty defendants.

 

By the way, nothing against prosecutors per se (my cousin's a prosecutor) but the system as a whole needs some work. For whatever it's worth I also think there are some things that need to be tweaked on the other side as well (i.e. technicalities). I just want to know: did the guy do it? If so, 'trow his @zz in jail. If not, let him be on his merry way.

[burning 4 revenge]

We need to do away with jury trials and we should consider doing away with the popular vote as well

[justpassingthrough]

I did jury duty once. From my experience juries take their duties quite seriously.

 

At least ours did.

 

It was a lawsuit, over the holidays, and it went on forever and ever.

 

Still, I would do it again. Can't imagine not. If I were on trial, I would hope there would be a group of people who would want to do the job and do it seriously.