It's over. I put a man in prison for the rest of his natural life.

[alan1]

The fact that I thought the law was unfair is secondary to the evidence presented.

By the way, I really don't need a lecture tonight.

Yes you do.

That's a matter of opinion. You really don't know the case nor what happened and frankly you're jumping to conclusions without hearing the full story.

Seriously, I don't need some message-board lawyer telling me about the law.

I was just responding to what you said about disagreeing with the law.

 

[Anguille]

That's a matter of opinion. You really don't know the case nor what happened and frankly you're jumping to conclusions without hearing the full story.

Seriously, I don't need some message-board lawyer telling me about the law.

Maybe he doesn't need a lecture either.

Yes I do.

Then let me give you an earful on how you're only here to help. And cause trouble.

 

[mudwhistle]

That's a matter of opinion. You really don't know the case nor what happened and frankly you're jumping to conclusions without hearing the full story.

Seriously, I don't need some message-board lawyer telling me about the law.

Maybe he doesn't need a lecture either.

Yes I do.

Well, now that you put it that way, I don't feel the need to give you one.

 

[alan1]

Maybe he doesn't need a lecture either.

Yes I do.

Then let me give you an earful on how you're only here to help. And cause trouble.

Go for it.

 

[mudwhistle]

Yes you do.

That's a matter of opinion. You really don't know the case nor what happened and frankly you're jumping to conclusions without hearing the full story.

Seriously, I don't need some message-board lawyer telling me about the law.

He is right though.

Not really.

Everyone has prejudices and opinions. As long as you're alive you have them. When being deposed you have to be empty-headed and never have formed an opinion in your life...or at least never used your own mind and give that impression to the lawyers or you'll be going out the door in short order.

I was aware of the law and took it into account and because the evidence was questionable at best I chose not to convict. That's my prerogative. A civil case is a different matter but a criminal case has to be certain.

 

[paperview]

That's a matter of opinion. You really don't know the case nor what happened and frankly you're jumping to conclusions without hearing the full story.

Seriously, I don't need some message-board lawyer telling me about the law.

He is right though.

Not really.

Everyone has prejudices and opinions. As long as you're alive you have them. When being deposed you have to be empty-headed and never have formed an opinion in your life...or at least never used your own mind and give that impression to the lawyers or you'll be going out the door in short order.

I was aware of the law and took it into account and because the evidence was questionable at best I chose not to convict. That's my prerogative. A civil case is a different matter but a criminal case has to be certain.

No, you only have to show you have no biases and can judge the case without prejudice.

You are not allowed to decide whether the law is correct. If you had a problem with it, you should have stated that during voir dire.

 

[mudwhistle]

Yes you do.

That's a matter of opinion. You really don't know the case nor what happened and frankly you're jumping to conclusions without hearing the full story.

Seriously, I don't need some message-board lawyer telling me about the law.

I was just responding to what you said about disagreeing with the law.

It's all good.

You made your point.

 

[mudwhistle]

He is right though.

Not really.

Everyone has prejudices and opinions. As long as you're alive you have them. When being deposed you have to be empty-headed and never have formed an opinion in your life...or at least never used your own mind and give that impression to the lawyers or you'll be going out the door in short order.

I was aware of the law and took it into account and because the evidence was questionable at best I chose not to convict. That's my prerogative. A civil case is a different matter but a criminal case has to be certain.

No, you only have to show you have no biases and can judge the case without prejudice.

You are not allowed to decide whether the law is correct. If you had a problem with it, you should have stated that during voir dire.

You're not living in reality.

But putting that aside, I decided the case on the merits of the evidence. If the evidence had been proved without a shadow of doubt I would have voted to convict in a microsecond.

We must assure the accused the benefit of the doubt.

 

[paperview]

Not really.

Everyone has prejudices and opinions. As long as you're alive you have them. When being deposed you have to be empty-headed and never have formed an opinion in your life...or at least never used your own mind and give that impression to the lawyers or you'll be going out the door in short order.

I was aware of the law and took it into account and because the evidence was questionable at best I chose not to convict. That's my prerogative. A civil case is a different matter but a criminal case has to be certain.

No, you only have to show you have no biases and can judge the case without prejudice.

You are not allowed to decide whether the law is correct. If you had a problem with it, you should have stated that during voir dire.

You're not living in reality.

But putting that aside, I decided the case on the merits of the evidence. If the evidence had been proved without a shadow of doubt I would have voted to convict in a microsecond.

We must assure the accused the benefit of the doubt.

That is true, but ...

You should have listened to Mountain Man's advice earlier then, and left out this sentence:

"I just couldn't see convicting her for something I felt was an unfair law."

That's where the problem was.

 

[alan1]

No, you only have to show you have no biases and can judge the case without prejudice.

You are not allowed to decide whether the law is correct. If you had a problem with it, you should have stated that during voir dire.

You're not living in reality.

But putting that aside, I decided the case on the merits of the evidence. If the evidence had been proved without a shadow of doubt I would have voted to convict in a microsecond.

We must assure the accused the benefit of the doubt.

That is true, but ...

You should have listened to Mountain Man's advice earlier then, and left out this sentence:

"I just couldn't see convicting her for something I felt was an unfair law."

That's where the problem was.

My opinion was half-baked though, for pointing that out.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I became even more sure when the judge came into the deliberation room after we had rendered our verdict and said "you were not allowed to hear this during the trial, but this man has previously brutally assaulted people in this fashion, and even spent time in prison for it."

.

and this is why i feel very often that the duty is a joke....your not allowed to know if the perp has done this before......if he has done the same crime numerous times and has done prison time for this same crime he is on trial for, before.....there is a dam good chance he has done it again....

 

[mudwhistle]

No, you only have to show you have no biases and can judge the case without prejudice.

You are not allowed to decide whether the law is correct. If you had a problem with it, you should have stated that during voir dire.

You're not living in reality.

But putting that aside, I decided the case on the merits of the evidence. If the evidence had been proved without a shadow of doubt I would have voted to convict in a microsecond.

We must assure the accused the benefit of the doubt.

That is true, but ...

You should have listened to Mountain Man's advice earlier then, and left out this sentence:

"I just couldn't see convicting her for something I felt was an unfair law."

That's where the problem was.

This may be true but after further explaining that statement and why I came to the conclusion I came to I think that everything worked out the way it should have.

I don't agree with the law that you can be convicted of DUI while sitting behind the wheel of a car that is parked and the key is out of the ignition.

The evidence showed there was enough doubt to keep her from being convicted. And if she had been proved to be intoxicated it wouldn't have mattered to me what I thought of the law. I would have nailed her ass.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I am glad you feel proud of doing your civic duty Paperview. I've been called up 3 times, and each time they called me the night before and said not to come in.

Why people are ragging on you I have no idea. If you were making excuses to GET OUT of Jury Duty, I could see people ragging on you, but for the fact that you did what you were supposed to do, and they still are bitching?

lol....i got on one once for a damed parking ticket....a cabby got one at Knotts Berry Farm....i could not believe the cop could not handle this on the street....we dumped all over the cop for letting this go beyond what it was.....the guy stopped in a red zone to let a tourist out to catch a bus that was leaving to go to LAX.....the loading zone was packed and the guy had to catch the bus....the cabby was there 5 min....

 

[AllieBaba]

I wonder if the line cops like to use on DUIIs who are hysterical and sobbing that their lives will be ruined works on someone who's been handed a life sentence?

"Hey, don't feel bad...this could really be a turning point in your life!"

I will say, in the nine hours of deliberation, we struggled with whether it was 1st degree or Second. We had very specific guideline to follow to determine what each was of course. I learned something too...I did not know premeditation could be a matter of literally seconds. It just meant that he gave a second thought to what he was doing and yet still proceeded.
It was a fascinating experience all in all, and fills one with a great sense of patriotism.

When he was given his sentence, he was unremorseful.

We are all better off one less dangerous asshole is off the streets. The prosecutors, detectives and police did a fine, fine job, I must say.

Good job. Now try to forget all the horrific images you were subjected to, as I'm sure you were.

This is what makes prosecutors and judges so jaded and sad. They look at t hose images day after day, and never lose them.

And don't bother second guessing your choice, unless there's like obvious jury tampering or something that went on. You did what you were supposed to do, justice was served as well as it could be. You participated in a wonderful process, though of course the case wasn't wonderful, and you served your country and society.

 

[paperview]

I became even more sure when the judge came into the deliberation room after we had rendered our verdict and said "you were not allowed to hear this during the trial, but this man has previously brutally assaulted people in this fashion, and even spent time in prison for it."

.

and this is why i feel very often that the duty is a joke....your not allowed to know if the perp has done this before......if he has done the same crime numerous times and has done prison time for this same crime he is on trial for, before.....there is a dam good chance he has done it again....

I don't know why it was inadmissible, but it was. Damn lawyers.

In this case though, the system worked and even without that inclusion, we still concluded he was guilty.

All of us concluded beyond a reasonable doubt, eventually, but it was a heavy burden. Some jurors cried in the deliberation room after the weight of the moment hit them, after we did our final, private polling and informed the bailiff we were ready. More from the gravity of it all I suspect.

But after the judge came in later, and told us how we rendered a good decision, and in fact, may have even saved some lives, and told us of his previous convictions, it certainly was a comfort to those who had wrestled so much with it through the deliberations.

I don't think Jury Duty is a joke.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It takes a special kind of asshole to to rip into someone who is proud they took part in our system and helped to put away someone for the rest of their life.

Why are you patting yourself on the back for doing your duty? It is your responsiblity as a US citizen.... nothing to be proud of. Jeeeeeez. Fucking liberals - what did you expect - Peter the Magic Pixie comes along and makes all the bad people good? Welcome to Reality 101. Idiot.

Do you have a per day quota of how many times you need to show yourself to be a spiteful asshole, or does it just come naturally?

Dwiddle dumb (aka California Girl) or she maybe dwiddle dumber, I always get Si modo an her confused, are little more than angry right wingers desperate for attention.

Thank you for your service and keep in mind your selection to a jury is evidence that three attorney's (Judge, DA and Defense) felt you had the judgement, sense and mental health necessary to serve faithfully, follow instructions and honestly evaluate the evidence.
Consider the Dwiddles, I suspect they wouldn't get past the bar, both are a bit

 

[paperview]

You're not living in reality.

But putting that aside, I decided the case on the merits of the evidence. If the evidence had been proved without a shadow of doubt I would have voted to convict in a microsecond.

We must assure the accused the benefit of the doubt.

That is true, but ...

You should have listened to Mountain Man's advice earlier then, and left out this sentence:

"I just couldn't see convicting her for something I felt was an unfair law."

That's where the problem was.

My opinion was half-baked though, for pointing that out.

Some things are good half-baked.

Ben & Jerry's ice cream for one.

 

[AllieBaba]

It's inadmissable because in the off chance that a guy has cleaned up his act, it's very hard not to convict based on past crimes.

The flip side of course is they let these insane bastards out, and they commit the same shit over and over...and it's a tragedy when the evidence is not super great, but the guy did it, but because you can't bring in past convictions, they get off.

 

[mudwhistle]

That is true, but ...

You should have listened to Mountain Man's advice earlier then, and left out this sentence:

"I just couldn't see convicting her for something I felt was an unfair law."

That's where the problem was.

My opinion was half-baked though, for pointing that out.

Some things are good half-baked.

Ben & Jerry's ice cream for one.

Just goes to show you....I guess everyone here needs to watch what they say because it just might bite you in the ass.

But I prefer Haugen daus.....

 

[JenyEliza]

What the fuck are you on about??

Jurors don't get to choose the penalty.

I help to put the bastard away with a Guilty verdict. Two counts. First Degree.

There was no blood evidence, no DNA, no fingerprints linking him - yet the evidence shown to us convinced us all (eventually) he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

I feel damn proud of what I did.

I lost 3 weeks of income serving on a jury, not to mention quite a few other things...yet I did my Civic Duty, trudged myself to the courtroom each day, exposed myself to other dangers, left with images of autopsy scenes, screams and cries that will never leave my mind, wrestled with the gravity of it all -

and you're here shitting on me?

Yep.

Read the link in my sig line before you shit ON ME.

I'm intimately familiar with the effects of murder on a family.

You didn't do anything brave or special. So stop bragging!

Oh, and don't fuck with me.

get over yourself.

Right back at ya, asshole. :::::::::::shooting bird finger at incredible asswipe above:::::::