Great input, guys!
And, I've been considering what a lot of you are saying. I think if we do this, we have to be realistic. We are all news junkies, so we ARE going to see outside influence. And, honestly, because we are a mock jury, and we've all demonstrated an ability to analyze the veracity of what the news has reported, I think we can still do it.
In fact, I think we can still do it and even discuss the case in other threads. But, when we discuss among ourselves, we agree that we only use information that is in the trial and in front of the jury. And, we agree that we will all do our best not to let the media and other information sources influence our decisions.
It's not going to be perfect, and it's not going to be real, but I think it will be an amusing exercise.
So far, our desired list of jurors is Si modo, Emma, Paperview, Gawdag, Gadfly, Bigreb, California Girl, Lockejaw, High_Gravity, Ravi, Uptownliving, and Trajan.
I propose the following alternates: Del, Intense, MeBelle, and Syrenn.
We can discuss other alternates, too.
I will send a PM to each poster informing them that they have been selected for the mock jury in this case.
I propose that they agree to the following:
1. We will be self governing, both mock jurors and alternates; and we understand that the greatest award all of us can get from this is if we all do our best to follow the guidelines we agree to follow.
2. We will only consider evidence and testimony presented at trial and while the real jury is present.
3. As we are all news junkies, we understand that we all will be exposed to media reports about the trial.
4. The mock jurors and the alternates will be equal members of this group with the only difference between the two groups is that those in the mock jurors group will have their final vote on the verdict counted.
5. We will pledge to each other that we will not allow the media reports to influence our discussions and opinions concerning the case and will each do our best to call attention to the extraneous information and not to allow that information to enter our discussion and points of arguments.
6. In breaking from the normal suggested operations of juries in the United States of America, and in the interest of keeping the thread lively and interesting, we will discuss the evidence as we become aware of it.
7. If any member believes any evidence or testimony another member presents to the group is information that is outside of what the real jury will hear or has heard, that member will tell the group. Then the group will decide, based on # 2 above, whether the group should continue discussing that information or not.
8. Of course, any member of USMB is free to post in the thread. Some of those posters may present information to the group that is not in compliance with # 2. The group will thank that other poster for their information and then inform the other poster that we cannot consider that information.
9. Invariably, there will be troll posts. Each member of the group pledges to the other members of this group that we will not be sidetracked into a troll argument and will continue to focus on the information pertaining to the trial and presented at the trial in the presence of the real jury. If we cannot resist the troll post, we pledge to start another thread on that topic.
10. We all understand that we are voluntarily participating in this exercise. We may withdraw at any time, but will let the group know immediately of our intent to leave the mock jury. At that point, the next alternate mock juror will be informed that their final vote on the case will be counted. Alternate mock jurors will be taken in alphabetical order of their usernames.
11. We will allow ourselves to participate in other threads about the trial, but will remember that we will only discuss information in compliance with # 2 above when we are in this thread.
12. If we have personal knowledge and/or experience on any topic we discuss, we will allow that input in our discussions, but we understand that we will provide supporting information to other mock jurors so that we all can be informed on that mock jurors expertise. For example, if a mock juror is personally familiar with a road intersection in Sanford, FL, and that is material information for making an intermediate decision, s/he will tell the group of that knowledge and provide supporting information about that knowledge as best s/he can.
Can you guys think of any other guideline we would all like to agree to or any edit of the above?
Once I have a final draft of the guidelines, I will send PMs to the mock jurors and alternates, and start a new thread for the mock jury and title that thread appropriately. And, when all reply and agree, we can get started.
If some of you are into more strict guidelines, Im still open to them, of course. But I also think we need to be realistic. I believe all who have shown an interest so far are perfectly capable of following the guidelines.
This sounds good to me, I am in.
