Jury Duty Summons

This is horrible. That is also the thing that gets innocent people jailed... the inability for people to make un-biased decisions.

 

i been summons 3 times Faithfully it seems like every 3 years i get a letter faithfully. I skipped out twice didn't mail the thing in and nothing happen and the 3rd time i called and they didn't called my number.

 

I was summoned, but the guy made a deal last minute so I didn't have to serve.

 

I've been summoned by California while living in Colorado and Colorado while living in Montana. It would be funny if Montana summoned me now, but I doubt it. I'll get summoned by California eventually, and given that I am training go be a civil servant it would be hypocritical of me to try and get out of it.

 

I thought it would be interesting... but you spend most of the time waiting! And the cases can be so ridiculous, I think the Judges should be on trial.

 

I'll simply ignore the anarcho-comminist quote because I don't see such systems as a realistic solution to anything. It's a nice theory but let's be honest... (especially in the US for that matter!)
You've been saying stuff such as 'there is discrimination because the Law says is ok'.
No, the 'bad law' is there because the government says discrimination is ok. When legislation is passed people don't just magically become antisemitic or homophobic; there's an awful lot of propaganda going on by the executive. So as I said, the Law is a knife and how you use it determines if it's a murder weapon or a kitchen utensil. The Law is neither 'good' or 'bad', people are.
Also as I said, just because the state's law enforcement machines are flawed it doesn't mean that the law is not a flawed concept. There should be ways of making sure this doesn't happen, through checks&balances, separation of powers, etc.
And indeed, too many laws do cause confuse and turn us into robots, but do you think Western countries are countries of too much unnecessary legislation? I mean have you seen North Korea?

Lol yes sry about that.

 

I got summoned last year, however it went to my parent's in the UK address (since the electoral roll never updated I wasnt taken off until october) anyway since I could prove I live in Ireland and I proved that I study a PhD here I got left off, if I live in the UK again in the next 3 years I have to do it immediately. Funny thing, as a British citizen in Ireland I have voting rights for the Parliament over here, however it also makes me callable for Jury Duty over here.

It sounds boring as hell, but you have to do it, I know in England they send you to jail for the two weeks you are summoned if you still refuse to do it, and after that you have to do the duty anyway.

I heard its the same in the US, they find you in contempt of court and you serve the time you would have served on duty in a jail cell..

 

Depends on the jurisdiction. Each state has their own laws and punishments, as do the Feds. There probably is a state that does that, but I bet there are states that don't.

 

I've been summoned several times, as it's very common in Baltimore, but never selected. I rather like going down to the courthouse. It's a pretty old building, lots of beautiful marble, and woodwork, and only about a 20 minute walk. Otherwise, I'd be having an hour commute to work, in horrid traffic. Nothing is as horrid as DC traffic.

Mainly, I just bring a book, and read, till called to a room, then, every time I've been questioned, I think I've appeared too liberal, stating things like "I'd have a difficult time with a guilty verdict in a marijuana case, because I don't see it as needing to be illegal." I answer honestly, and they've never picked me.

Where I work now, I get paid like I normally would, plus the court gives me $15 for lunch. (and I save about $8 in gas) So it's like a day off work, with a free $23 lunch. I can't wait to get called up again this year.

 

I just got my summons for some time in June. Luckily shouldn't conflict with school but it's looking to be an interesting case just based on what I know about it (apparently, it's a murder case). Least they're paying me.

 

I got summoned for jury duty a few years ago. I had to wait in the courthouse for a few hours with a few hundred people. They had to pick people for three different court cases that day. They told people to raise their hands if they wanted to do jury duty, and enough people happened to raise their hands so I got to go home.
My mom got summoned for jury duty one time a few years ago. My mom has severe anxiety, so when the judge called for people to give excuses as to why they couldn't do it, she got to go talk to the judge. She was crying hysterically, and he deemed her not fit for trial. My dad on the other hand has always wanted to serve on jury duty, and he has never been called. Go figure.

 

Twice.

After seeing 12 Angry Men many years ago, I've always done my best to be selected, and to be as fair-minded as possible. It also helps that I'm pursuing a career in the Criminal Justice field, so things like this pertain to and interest me. The first case I was summoned for, we had a murder case, and the second time I was summoned was for a domestic abuse case. I can remember a few people in the jury of the first case, complaining and saying things like, "He obviously killed him, why are we still here?"

And this was before the defense got a chance to speak. I, having nothing to do, decided to delay and stall. I was of the opinion, if you weren't going to give somebody on trial a little time to consider their fate, then I'd give a little of mine to take a little of yours.

With the second case, the domestic abuse one, it wasn't too bad. Most of them were just bored, and had zoned out here and there, so they missed a few pieces of evidence. I was fortunate that one woman had actually been paying attention, she actually brought them up to speed.

It may be boring at times, and it can seem time consuming, but there's not enough fair-minded people. There's too much of a herd mentality with jurors. If anyone ever gets the chance to serve, do so, especially if it's a severe case. Karma may decide to place you where judgment will be cast upon you someday.

 

I served on a misdemeanor trial after postponing for 6 months because I was a busy graduate student.

The jury selection process was boring and frustrating. It lasted almost as long as the trial itself. When I was called up, I was too nervous answering questions in front of a room of about 65 people to use any of my intended strategies to get excused (jury nullification and auditory processing disorder).

We deliberated for about 7 hours over 2 days after a 2 1/2 day trial. We were unable to reach a verdict on any of the 4 charges (child endangerment, attempted child endangerment, public intoxication, and attempted DUI), primarily because one juror was an idiot and voted not guilty on 3 out of 4 charges. Another juror voted not guilty on every charge in response, since he didn't want to convict on the public intoxication charge without convicting on the other charges (which in this case may have been preferable for the defendant, which is why the defense lawyer admitted she was drunk in the opening statements, and did not ask us to acquit on that charge in his closing arguments).

In the US, such doubt would be enough to justify voting not guilty. The following portion of a Supreme Court ruling was part of the jury instructions I was given before deliberation, and I believe it is given to every jury:

"The prisoner's guilt must be established beyond reasonable doubt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is such as will produce an abiding conviction in the mind to a moral certainty that the fact exists that is claimed to exist, so that you feel certain that it exists. A balance of proof is not sufficient. A juror in a criminal case ought not to condemn unless the evidence excludes from his mind all reasonable doubt; unless he be so convinced by the evidence, no matter what the class of the evidence, of the defendant's guilt, that a prudent man would feel safe to act upon that conviction in matters of the highest concern and importance to his own dearest personal interests."

The defendant does have the right to waive the right to a jury trial. However, doing so is usually not in the defendant's advantage, since it only takes 1 dissenting juror to cause a mistrial (in 48 out of 50 states and in federal court). The jury on which I served had smart people on it, such as a PhD who previously lectured at Stanford, a MD, and a retired Boeing manager, yet we failed to convict the defendant on any of the 4 counts in spite of overwhelming evidence because one person was an idiot.

While I disagree with you on some of your other points, I agree that the incarceration rate is far too high in America due in part to unjust laws. Jurors can help solve that problem through the power of jury nullification.

 

I actually have a Jury Summons for tomorrow, lol. I can call in 7 hours to find out if I have to appear.

I've had a summons every single year since I turned 18 or 19. It's rather ridiculous. My older sister has only been called once. A family friend in her 40s has never been called. I just get unlucky. :/

The times I've had to show up (all but one), I got excused before Jury Selection occurred, except the first time, where I was later excused before even being questioned. The last time I was excused because it was a murder trial that would take months, and I was excused for extreme hardship as without income and with a bad back, I have no reliable way to arrive at the courthouse. This is usually not an excuse for minor trials, but for long ones it is.

I'm just hoping the next one is cancelled and I don't have to report. X_x However, I won't serve on a jury. Don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE to, but I don't trust the police here in any regard. I will never give a guilty verdict to someone arrested by a police officer here, as I will ALWAYS think there's a good chance they were wrongly arrested. The police here are horrible. I'm sure it's not that way elsewhere, but here? No. I had multiple friends shot and killed by police in the last decade. :/ One was unarmed, and 16 years old. >_>

 

I have been called quite a few times, and at ridiculous times, such as when a full time student in college, and have gotten out of it. I've also had work loads for which I was the only one able to carry out the work, or lead it, and I have gotten out of it, too. The very first time I went, right after college, the defense attorney booted me during questioning using the peremptory privilege. This is their prerogative to release a potential juror who may not resonate with them. She didn't like my answer about how I would make a decision where I stated something like 'I would put together what I hear logically and make a decision.' I thought 'good' and 'bitch' at the same time. That was a perfectly logical answer to her question.

I finally got called within the last handful of years and went. I thought I'd get released, as in "no need today," but I was put on a jury. I was asked to be the foreman. I kept my cool throughout the process, but I was truly disgusted. The infraction was minor and deliberating for several days, only to witness people's prejudices and to arrive at no verdict because of a hung jury, told me how wasteful the process can be. And, believe me, educated people can be prejudiced and bring their issues or preconceptions into the jury room.

More recently, I was released from yet another call for jury duty because my mental health practitioner intervened. I'm sure the court systems see this and will not make a fuss. There are plenty of people who work as padding in large companies, homemakers, seniors, and others on trust funds who they can pick from and will go to jury duty.