5 ms·

I have never been on a list for consideration to sit in a jury, but my impression of the process is not very high: I am led to believe that successful, intellig

by kw71 11y ago

I have never been on a list for consideration to sit in a jury, but my impression of the process is not very high: I am led to believe that successful, intelligent people more likely to be excused by virtue of having something to do (my family/business depends on me being productive and not in court) but also that anyone with relevant experience related to the matters at issue will be excused on the basis that they are not 'impartial.' With the recent popularity of stories about false convictions and bad evidence, I wonder how it would be different if we could make sure that a jury included a scientist, medical doctor or lab technician in cases where someone from those professions was to be asked for his conclusions in court. I would be surprised if my view that winning a jury trial is all about showmanship is in the minority.

dragonwriter 11y ago
Both of your impressions are generally wrong. Having something important to do with very few narrow exceptions justified, at least in California, a deferral of service to a specified future date, not an excuse; relevant experience usually doesn't justify a for-cause challenge, but may be the basis for a peremptory challenge. Though, even there, I think it's a lot less so than popular, entertainment media driven, perceptions would suggest. Your view may or may not be in the minority, but even if it isn't that doesn't make it correct, just popular.
- JoblessWonder 11y ago
  I wish he would see your response, because you are 100% correct (at least in California.) I've been called for jury duty in two different counties and every time we get into a courtroom the people who have flimsy "sob" stories are usually told to buck up and aren't excused.
venomsnake 11y ago
You have the power of jury nullification. That alone is a good reason to attend if given the opportunity.
- BJBBB 11y ago
  Juror nullification not permitted in many states. In California, you will be found in contempt of court for doing so, or at best be removed from the jury for misconduct. Also, essentially zero federal judges will permit any open discussion of law nullification.
  - hippich 11y ago
    While I see how discussion can be prevented, but how actually juror can be stopped from nullifying the law? From my understanding this is catch-22 - you should follow law but juror can not be prosecuted for not following it.
    - Crito 11y ago
      I don't know if this is actually what happens, but I think in theory it could work like this: 1) They ask you during selection, while under oath, questions which amount do "are you aware of jury nullification, and/or, are you willing to apply the law" 2) You lie, and answer those questions with the answers they want, and get selected. 3) You refuse to convict, despite overwhelming evidence, because you're into the idea of nullification. 4) They somehow prove that you lied during step 2, while under oath. How that 4th one works, I don't know. Does anybody have any examples of it happening?
      - hippich 11y ago
        From my understanding, judges/prosecutors are trying to make no mention whatsoever about nullification. Probably because then juror might actually consider it. But I am not citizen and never been juror or witnessed one :) just read some wiki pages.
        Crito 11y ago
        My understanding is that they absolutely will not mention it by name, or even elude to it, but will instead ask questions which would cover it. For instance something like, "Are you willing to carry out the law as it is written?" or "Are you willing to decide this case based on the facts presented to you." or something else to that effect. If you know of and believe in jury nullification, the honest answer to those questions is "No." That might not be exactly what they ask, but I think it's something like that at least.
hondo77 11y ago
So, you haven't actually been on a jury but you know all about the people on juries? Must be nice to be psychic.
- kw71 11y ago
  I've talked to many people who have sat on a jury, supported a girlfriend through law school, and have a few practicing attorneys in my social circle. So I haven't formed my opinions from Hollywood or even news/magazine articles where the topic is a miscarriage of justice. Wrt this article, it seems like the jury was fed a big steamy plate of you know what and they ate it up.
- spacemanmatt 11y ago
  It's not actually unreasonable to learn about things that you have not personally experienced.
sliverstorm 11y ago
My opinion of juries did take a bit of a nosedive when I was dismissed from a jury pool after sharing only my age, residence, name, and profession (engineer). In favor of other jurors who had glaringly obvious conflict-of-interest risks, like the juror whose entire family was police officers, for a case that had significant police testimony.
- sliverstorm 11y ago
  (sorry I think I meant moral hazards, not conflict of interest)

by kw71 11y ago

dragonwriter 11y ago

Both of your impressions are generally wrong. Having something important to do with very few narrow exceptions justified, at least in California, a deferral of service to a specified future date, not an excuse; relevant experience usually doesn't justify a for-cause challenge, but may be the basis for a peremptory challenge. Though, even there, I think it's a lot less so than popular, entertainment media driven, perceptions would suggest. Your view may or may not be in the minority, but even if it isn't that doesn't make it correct, just popular.

JoblessWonder 11y ago
I wish he would see your response, because you are 100% correct (at least in California.) I've been called for jury duty in two different counties and every time we get into a courtroom the people who have flimsy "sob" stories are usually told to buck up and aren't excused.

venomsnake 11y ago

You have the power of jury nullification. That alone is a good reason to attend if given the opportunity.

BJBBB 11y ago
Juror nullification not permitted in many states. In California, you will be found in contempt of court for doing so, or at best be removed from the jury for misconduct. Also, essentially zero federal judges will permit any open discussion of law nullification.
- hippich 11y ago
  While I see how discussion can be prevented, but how actually juror can be stopped from nullifying the law? From my understanding this is catch-22 - you should follow law but juror can not be prosecuted for not following it.
  - Crito 11y ago
    I don't know if this is actually what happens, but I think in theory it could work like this: 1) They ask you during selection, while under oath, questions which amount do "are you aware of jury nullification, and/or, are you willing to apply the law" 2) You lie, and answer those questions with the answers they want, and get selected. 3) You refuse to convict, despite overwhelming evidence, because you're into the idea of nullification. 4) They somehow prove that you lied during step 2, while under oath. How that 4th one works, I don't know. Does anybody have any examples of it happening?
    - hippich 11y ago
      From my understanding, judges/prosecutors are trying to make no mention whatsoever about nullification. Probably because then juror might actually consider it. But I am not citizen and never been juror or witnessed one :) just read some wiki pages.
      - Crito 11y ago
        My understanding is that they absolutely will not mention it by name, or even elude to it, but will instead ask questions which would cover it. For instance something like, "Are you willing to carry out the law as it is written?" or "Are you willing to decide this case based on the facts presented to you." or something else to that effect. If you know of and believe in jury nullification, the honest answer to those questions is "No." That might not be exactly what they ask, but I think it's something like that at least.

hondo77 11y ago

So, you haven't actually been on a jury but you know all about the people on juries? Must be nice to be psychic.

kw71 11y ago
I've talked to many people who have sat on a jury, supported a girlfriend through law school, and have a few practicing attorneys in my social circle. So I haven't formed my opinions from Hollywood or even news/magazine articles where the topic is a miscarriage of justice. Wrt this article, it seems like the jury was fed a big steamy plate of you know what and they ate it up.
spacemanmatt 11y ago
It's not actually unreasonable to learn about things that you have not personally experienced.

sliverstorm 11y ago

My opinion of juries did take a bit of a nosedive when I was dismissed from a jury pool after sharing only my age, residence, name, and profession (engineer). In favor of other jurors who had glaringly obvious conflict-of-interest risks, like the juror whose entire family was police officers, for a case that had significant police testimony.

sliverstorm 11y ago
(sorry I think I meant moral hazards, not conflict of interest)