Annals of Justice, Division of Jury Duty
Next case: Medical malpractice! The hand of fate reached into the hat and pulled out 25 names at random. As each name was read off, its owner stood. I was number 24.
Surveys were distributed. There were scores if not hundreds of names of individuals and institutions. Did we know any of them? If so, in what capacity? Once again, a couple were known to me, but it would take an interview to impart this critical bit of information. One o’clock stole upon us. What Wodehouse describes as that not unpleasant feeling of emptiness that is the silent luncheon gong of the soul had sounded. We had 60 minutes to heed its call. I made my way to the 2nd floor, which advertised a cafeteria. I saw to my dismay that, in my case, at least, that sensation of emptiness was going to have to be prolonged. I surmised that a “Bubba Burger” was not calculated to please the Kimball palate. I made my way sadly back upstairs and waited. And waited. Potential Juror Number 1 was interviewed. Ten minutes later, it was Number 2’s turn. Some more time passed. It was about 3:00 p.m. when Number 14 was called, 4:00 before they got to Number 20. I was reading with relish about how Cicero, when consul, had summarily dispatched Lentulus and several other Catiline conspirators, ordering them dropped into a hole in the state prison in the Forum and strangled. Efficient, I thought. (What would he have done with drones?)
4:30 came. The once bustling room was occupied now by myself, slouched unhappily in my chair, and a woman who paced back and forth in her hat and coat, muttering into her cell phone and eying the clock plaintively. Barbara popped her head into the room. “Is someone still in there?” she asked. Neither my pacing partner in melancholy nor I had the will to answer that rhetorical question. Barbara padded over to the interview room for a word with the Perry Masons inside. “You can go,” she proclaimed magnificently on her return: the pacer and I, presumably, would be granted our audience on Monday. It was now 4:50. Eight hours and twenty minutes. The “Sons of Anarchy” was a nice touch. And the “Happy Birthday” lady offered a moment’s amusement. The awful power of state had commanded the presence of some 100 citizens. Most were freed within a couple hours. A few of us were less lucky. Was it the wheels of justice we heard grinding away, or merely the wheels of the hypertrophied state apparatus masquerading as justice?
.
I love Democracy -- it's having to rub shoulders with less-than-attractive fellow citizens in carrying out mundance, inconvenient civic duties I can't stand.
By all means let's replace Son-of-Anarchy Guy and Overweight iPhone Lady with the sort of terrifying professional busybodies who sue elementary schools over religious holiday displays and rat out their neighbors to HOAs.
http://fija.org/
gets me free every time. it seems when you know that:
"The primary function of the independent juror is not, as many think, to dispense punishment to fellow citizens accused of breaking various laws, but rather to protect fellow citizens from tyrannical government" (excerpt from FIJA front page)
They immediately want nothing to do with you and send you on your way.
(at least, that was my experience...twice)
- a -
1) an advanced education (or comparable assets of intellect or erudition);
2) experience or expertise in the matter of the controversy;
3) any perceptible leadership qualities;
...he is summarily discharged.
Just by brandishing that bio of Cicero, you would have been waved off before you could be impaneled.
.
I love Democracy -- it's having to rub shoulders with less-than-attractive fellow citizens in carrying out mundance, inconvenient civic duties I can't stand.
By all means let's replace Son-of-Anarchy Guy and Overweight iPhone Lady with the sort of terrifying professional busybodies who sue elementary schools over religious holiday displays and rat out their neighbors to HOAs.
And ajaxoftherockies? Your FIJA.org tshirt might get you out of jury duty but it also reduces your chance to educate other jurors about their duty to decide if a law is fairly applied. If someone is in the tiny minority that has the guts to take their case before a jury, we should have the guts to be there for them.
You are exactly right prairie wind. The number of innocent people manipulated into a plea agreement by unscrupulous prosecutors is not insignificant, and when, as you say some one has the guts to stand up to the "system" we should be there for our fellow citizens.
How often do we hear someone complaining about the government or the system, and then when they have an opportunity do something about it by serving on a jury they make excuses and throw away that chance.
I have had enough personal experience with being falsely prosecuted to have my eyes opened to the real world of criminal prosecutors.
Police and prosecutors have no interest in truth, or justice or the lives of the people the are supposed to serve. They have one concern and one concern only and that is to get as many convictions as possible. Guilt or innocence of the defendant means nothing to them. They are playing a game and playing only to win.
They use prosecutorial discretion to select which cases the will prosecute. Their only criteria is which case they believe will result in a conviction; they have no reservations about knowingly convicting an innocent individual if it will pad their resume as a crime fighter. As I said they're playing a game and they want to face the easiest pitching possible. They same standard applies when selecting a jury; they want one that is easy to manipulate.
A real person's future may be hanging in the balance. That's why people like Roger Kimball should try to be ON the jury not avoid it.
The trial by jury is the last vestige of government by the people that remains in America today. The government can second guess just about everything we do today but a jury's decision is final.
Jurors have a chance have not to decide if the law is being fairly applied but, regardless of jury instructions by any judge they also have the right, no, obligation of jury nullification, that is to acquit based on the belief that the law in question is unjust. I know jury nullification is not popular these days but was once considered a legitimate role of the jury.
For example how many would return a runaway slave legally captured, and required to be returned to his "rightful" owner under runaway slave laws?
The chance to be on a jury is the opportunity to participate in America as it was meant to be.
Whatever the issues with jury duty, it would only be worse with unelected "professional deciders."
I've been called for jury duty several times since then. Our small jury document asks for any previous jury duty. During voie dire, whenever I tell the court that the prosecutor called us "stupid", both attorney's leap up and approach, and I am thanked for my time and dismissed from any further duty.