Jury Duty

[Care4all]

Shrink the jury to 9 individuals such as the supreme court. Eliminate 25% of the problem in the stroke of a pen. Damn! That is a good idea.

I mean, hey! If 9 folks say you ought to swing, you ought to swing. It certainly would be easier to find 9 qualified jurors than 12. Damn I R smart, ain't I.

You're going down the wrong route Emmett.

If I had been eroneously charged with a crime, I would MOST CERTAINLY want 12 jurrors made up of my peers on the jury!

We don't have a shortage of jurrors.

And just because some of you feel guilty that you don't do the ONE duty that our country asks of us every day citizen, doesn't mean we need to change the JUSTICE system to suit your whims and needs or so to make you feel less guilty.... imho.

care

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I refuse to serve on a jury. Why? Because I dont believe in the justice system.
Look at OJ, Robert Blake, Phil Spector, Paris Hilton, etc.

Legally you can nor "refuse" if summoned you either have to have a reason acceptable to the court for not coming or you have to be excused after getting there.

In my case I have received 2 summons, one I was sick and couldn't go the other the cases that week were all suspended for some reason and all juror potentials were excused before we even reported. That would be local courts, I do not think there are any federal Courts in this area except like Bankruptcy and such.

 

[Cynic-American]

Legally you can nor "refuse" if summoned you either have to have a reason acceptable to the court for not coming or you have to be excused after getting there.

I give them a bogus reason or I just come out and say "I dont believe in the corrupt system".

 

[Cynic-American]

Celebrity cases aren't the norm and the justice system shouldn't be judged by them, IMO.

bs. I have seen first hand how people are treated because of their appearance or what connections they have. I took participation in gov.courses and law courses and frankly, its not surprising that law is such a popular field, because it sponsors corruption.

 

[jillian]

bs. I have seen first hand how people are treated because of their appearance or what connections they have. I took participation in gov.courses and law courses and frankly, its not surprising that law is such a popular field, because it sponsors corruption.

And your vast personal experience with lawyers is??

Life is such that our contacts benefit us as do our appearances. Pretty women don't get traffic tickets (except from female cops). Tall men are hired more readily than shorter men. Family contacts and professional contacts and political contacts give us entree to jobs and opportunities. What I was taught was that if I was given an opportunity, it was up to me to then work twice as hard to earn my status. If someone has no merit, it doesn't matter what contacts they have... they will fail.

By the by, law is a popular field because a) it's interesting; b) it's something to do if you're good at writing but don't like math; an c) it's something to do after getting a liberal arts degree and saying "now what?"

Me? I love law. I just can't say I always like the practice of law.

 

[Cynic-American]

And your vast personal experience with lawyers is??

Life is such that our contacts benefit us as do our appearances. Pretty women don't get traffic tickets (except from female cops). Tall men are hired more readily than shorter men. Family contacts and professional contacts and political contacts give us entree to jobs and opportunities. What I was taught was that if I was given an opportunity, it was up to me to then work twice as hard to earn my status. If someone has no merit, it doesn't matter what contacts they have... they will fail.

your point is...? My point is that people escape justice based on their connections, some dont based on their appearance.

My experiences with lawyers? I have 2 in the family and we discuss topics.
Law seems to attract those who take advantage of loopholes in an already broken system, hence they are no better than the system.

 

[pegwinn]

I refuse to serve on a jury. Why? Because I dont believe in the justice system.
Look at OJ, Robert Blake, Phil Spector, Paris Hilton, etc.

OK, you don't believe etc etc. How would you do it and why?

Why are you resurrecting all the old and boring threads?

Just out of curiousity, why Paris Hilton? She got a worse sentence than anyone else similarly situated would have.

Celebrity cases aren't the norm and the justice system shouldn't be judged by them, IMO.

What do you mean boring? I started this thread and it is far less boring than the Bush Sucks / No he doesn't / Yes he does / No, Monica did threads that are the norm. Additionally, I do not allow "boring" anywhere near me.

I am not conceited.

I am convinced.

 

[Cynic-American]

OK, you don't believe etc etc. How would you do it and why?

How would I get out of jury duty?
I explained it above.

A few years ago I was called to sit on a jury but before I could, they asked about my profession and how I felt about drugs (the defendant was a Hispanic male caught with 1 gram of coke).
I said I believe in legalization of it.

 

[pegwinn]

How would I get out of jury duty?
I explained it above.

A few years ago I was called to sit on a jury but before I could, they asked about my profession and how I felt about drugs (the defendant was a Hispanic male caught with 1 gram of coke).
I said I believe in legalization of it.

Negative Ghostwriter. You don't believe in our system of justice. What is your better idea?

 

[Cynic-American]

Negative Ghostwriter. You don't believe in our system of justice. What is your better idea?

I didn't say I have a better idea. But I do know I dont want to be a part of the problem.

 

[pegwinn]

I didn't say I have a better idea. But I do know I dont want to be a part of the problem.

That way lies madness.

If you have thought enough to determine you disagree, and if you are able to articulate why you disagree, then logically you must have an idea of how you would do it if you were omnipotent for one day.

So give.

Tag, you're it.

 

[Cynic-American]

That way lies madness.

If you have thought enough to determine you disagree, and if you are able to articulate why you disagree, then logically you must have an idea of how you would do it if you were omnipotent for one day.

So give.

Tag, you're it.

I would execute those with enough evidence against them, no possibility of parole, no deals to give up someone worse. We have a system that allows too many guilty people to go free and we wonder why our society is dying.

I am going to bed now.

 

[pegwinn]

Fair enough. Perhaps you will sleep on this and come back tomorrow:

I would execute those with enough evidence against them, no possibility of parole, no deals to give up someone worse. Who would find them guilty under your system? IF you don't trust the jury portion of the justice system would it be by a single judge? Or perhaps truth serum?

We have a system that allows too many guilty people to go free and we wonder why our society is dying. I actually agree with this to a great extent. But, I have to ask: Is it the jury system? Is it the proscutions rules of engagement? Is it $$$ buys justice? Why or how are we letting the guilty go free?

I am going to bed now. Sleep well

 

[jillian]

What do you mean boring? I started this thread and it is far less boring than the Bush Sucks / No he doesn't / Yes he does / No, Monica did threads that are the norm. Additionally, I do not allow "boring" anywhere near me.

I am not conceited.

I am convinced.

Heh... wasn't specifically directed to this thread. He was bopping around all yesterday a.m. resurrecting dead threads. This was just the one I asked the question on. No offense intended.

And yes, it's more interesting than Bush sucks, no he doesn't; or Clinton sucked, no he didn't.

Apologies.

 

[jillian]

your point is...? My point is that people escape justice based on their connections, some dont based on their appearance.

My experiences with lawyers? I have 2 in the family and we discuss topics.
Law seems to attract those who take advantage of loopholes in an already broken system, hence they are no better than the system.

People escape justice because of their connections? I don't think that's generally the case. If you think so, perhaps you can say why Paris Hilton was treated worse under the circumstances than someone else similarly situated.

Loopholes? You mean rules?

Like it or not, everything has rules. Civil cases have rules; criminal cases have rules. It is the JOB of the defense attorney in a civil case to make sure the prosecution lives by those rules. That isn't a loophole... it's law.

So, perhaps your argument is that people become lawyers because they like law?

How would you suggest we try someone accused of a crime? (and remember, they are only ACCUSED until a jury says otherwise). Should they say "oops, you got me"? Should the prosecutor be allowed to put unreliable or tainted evidence before a jury? Should hearsay be allowed when someone's freedom is at stake?

 

[Adam's Apple]

Retired folks, housewives, unemployed, oh wait a minute! That IS who's serving on our juries.

Maybe in your neck of the woods, but not in mine. The times I have been summoned to be part of a jury pool, at least 70% of those called where employed in responsible positions. Only a small number were retirees or housewives.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Maybe in your neck of the woods, but not in mine. The times I have been summoned to be part of a jury pool, at least 70% of those called where employed in responsible positions. Only a small number were retirees or housewives.

LOL, one would think that , according to the poster you responded to, our legal system has a master list of retired people, house wives ( that do not work) and unemployed to call up for Jury Duty. More importantly is the implication in the statement and your reply that these people are unable to ( if put on a Jury) adequately perform the functions required on a Jury and that our Lawyers both Prosecutors and Defenders are incompetent for allowing these "rejects" to serve.

 

[Cynic-American]

That isn't a loophole... it's law.

So, perhaps your argument is that people become lawyers because they like law?

no, they aren't rules, they are loopholes to allow scum to go free.
People are attracted to law because they want to take advantage of a corrupt system.
As for the questions, I gave my opinion on what should be in place.

 

[Shogun]

People are attracted to law because they want to take advantage of a corrupt system.

 

[doniston]

Legally you can nor "refuse" if summoned you either have to have a reason acceptable to the court for not coming or you have to be excused after getting there.

In my case I have received 2 summons, one I was sick and couldn't go the other the cases that week were all suspended for some reason and all juror potentials were excused before we even reported. That would be local courts, I do not think there are any federal Courts in this area except like Bankruptcy and such.

You aren't gonna like this, but for once I agree with Cynic, and you are also wrong. I was permanently excused from jury duty some twenty years ago for agreeing that the jury system stinks, publicizing my position in the local newspaper,, (including that I would likely beleive the accused rather than either of the Attorneys or the Judge)and even taking the superior court to court as a result A week later I received a permanent excusal. I have never been sorry for it either.