General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCurious: How Many Here Have Actually Served On A Jury ?
I don't mean being called in for jury duty, I mean sat as a juror for an actual trial for more than a day or two ?
I have one time, and it was a murder trial. It was as serious as it could possibly be.
I ask, because I am amused at the outrage of some, regarding the Georgia Grand Jury Forewoman.
When they say "Jury of Your Peers", they ain't kidding.
When I went in to our assigned trial, we were informed that the Death Penalty had been taken off the table, so the maximum sentence we could hand down would be Life in Prison.
Most, not all, of my fellow jurors were annoyed at the whole thing. They wanted to hurry things along, kept looking at their watches, and scribbling in their day planners. We were given several verdicts and penalties we could deliver, the majority jumped at the harshest without consideration, just to get the thing done with. Like THEIR time was being wasted.
During the breaks, I would find a place to smoke a cigarette and decompress. A couple times the Judge, an elderly Black Man, would be there smoking along with me and a few others.
I knew we couldn't talk about the trial "ex parte" or whatever the rule is, but... I did ask him what he thought about the jury system.
I came to believe he noticed my exasperation, and smiled and said, "It's a jury of one's peers, and as flawed as it is, it's still the best way to justice."
So I'm gonna give Emily from Georgia a break here. They don't prepare you for dealing with a case with such historical implications, or the press, or some idiot with a knife or a gun.
I hope she stays safe, and I appreciate her service to the State of Georgia, and to us all.
samnsara
(18,771 posts).....negativity and pearl clutching I've read here.
Johnny2X2X
(24,309 posts)And a Republican Prosecutor convenes a grand jury, and then one of those jurors appears on FOX News to seemingly gloat about incoming indictments.
This was a terrible idea, but it was the juror's idea alone and no one could really stop her from doing this. When the indictments come down, no one will be talking about this juror except for FOX News.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)TWELVE ANGRY MEN it's not...
hlthe2b
(114,167 posts)It was eye-opening, for sure.
FalloutShelter
(14,528 posts)It was a trial of a burglary ring, we delivered a unanimous guilty verdict, but yes- most of my fellow jury members were clearly aggravated that they had to serve at all.
I have seen a lot of aggravation in general here on DU. We are all exhausted and enraged that justice is taking so long.
Some of our neighbors have become so abhorrent that we are loosing our generosity of spirit.
We need to be kinder to one another as Democrats or we will fracture our own party.
Duppers
(28,469 posts)TY.
moonscape
(5,781 posts)FalloutShelter
(14,528 posts)gab13by13
(32,483 posts)Right before deliberations, lucky for that guy, several jurors were ready to hang him before they saw any evidence.
Called to federal so I wore. 3 piece suit, automatic rejection. Was in the running for a cocaine case and happened to step in the elevator with the perps, boy did they clam up.
Lovie777
(23,207 posts)worked for law firms and family is law enforcement.
Personally I would say this is quite usual, but alas, let's see what happens. GQP are quiet right now, but 3...2...1..., they will become predictable.
Emile
(42,587 posts)Last edited Wed Feb 22, 2023, 11:12 AM - Edit history (1)
a week long. One criminal and one civil.
First trial was burglary. Young man broke into closed gas station and stolen 40 cartons of cigarettes.
Second trial was a guy claiming the elevator at Purdue University fell several stories and he injured his back.
Just got a jury notice that I have jury duty the next 12 months.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)down and there was no trial.
There was lot of bitching about wasted time, though. We got nothing for a wasted day off.
Listened to head of the grand jury in Georgia--She's got my respect.
Auggie
(33,219 posts)We found no clear evidence of fraud in the first. In the second, we awarded the plaintiff a lot of money.
Many years prior I was questioned to sit on a murder trial. I had a job interview and the judge let me off.
Wounded Bear
(64,431 posts)we hung because one guy wouldn't convict. The 11 of us came to consensus on both charges, but not him. I believe he was compromised and shouldn't have been on the jury at all, but
We had a pretty good bunch, most of us were paying attention. But then, I wasn't looking at my fellow jurors much.Lasted about 3 weeks over the holidays, so the actual elapsed time was closer to 5 or 6 IIRC.
yardwork
(69,465 posts)It's frustrating how many times one juror will convince the other eleven to acquit, meaning the person can never be charged again for that crime. A hung jury means the prosecution can try again.
MichMan
(17,233 posts)The case was pretty clear as the driver not only admitted he was driving & didn't have one, he said he had no intention of ever getting one. Something about the State requiring a SS # and he refused to supply that info as he didn't believe in the SS system. Started saying he had a lawsuit against the DMV, but the judge cut him off and said that wasn't relevant. He then wanted to call the county prosecutor as a witness, but the judge shut that down as well.
When we went to deliberate, we figured it was a pretty easy decision. One juror however refused to find him guilty as she pulled out a pocket constitution and said people had an inherent right to travel and a license wasn't necessary. When we asked why no one had successfully challenged the state law for 70 years, her reply was that the entire court system was corrupt.
Asked her if a license wasn't required, how could one be taken away for drunk driving, or why an airline pilot had to be licensed ? Her answer was, "Well, that's different" Finally we asked her if she had one, and when she said yes, we asked her "Why ?" and would she rip it up in front of us? I finally told her that when she answered in jury selection if she could be fair and impartial she lied, since she obviously was never going to convict anyone on that charge. Felt like pounding my head against the wall.
She wouldn't budge, so it was a mis trial. The judge was NOT amused. The accused was found guilty a couple weeks later.
marmar
(79,830 posts)multigraincracker
(37,802 posts)I answered every question honestly.
Karadeniz
(24,749 posts)walkingman
(10,974 posts)I can now opt out because of my age so I do. When I worked I enjoyed doing it as a diversion from work but now it is just a pain in the ass so I don't. The one civil suit was a con man and one of the criminal was robbery and the other was assault.
It was a learning experience for me.
Ferrets are Cool
(23,002 posts)The biggest problem I have with her is that, IMO, she should have just stayed quiet.
claudette
(5,455 posts)👍
getagrip_already
(17,802 posts)Called once, but not chosen.
It's odd how some people get called many times and others not all.
vanlassie
(6,255 posts)when they asked people to come forward if they had plans such as trips or vacations coming up in the next month.
It seemed like half the room went rushing up to the front, clearly expecting to be excused.
BUT.
They excused the rest of us!
Funniest thing ever. They took the ones who were so eager to get excluded back straight away so they could get straight into jury selection!
claudette
(5,455 posts)interviews to the media. She is free to discuss it now with anyone but making her silliness public is a disgrace. Where is her family?
Im never chosen as a juror because I always say the defendant would testify if s/he is innocent
LakeArenal
(29,949 posts)More of a trial about contracts than crime.
The most bored, falling asleep people were the law clerks that were with the lawyers. They were all yawning and nodding off. I was pissed. If Im paying for a lawyer I would want them to stay awake.
RoadRunner
(4,719 posts)Three months term. We were by told in first session never talk about what goes on with cases, not even to wife or husband.
Talitha
(8,075 posts)Both were for drunk driving.
But I'm in WI though, so...
S/V Loner
(9,556 posts)rape trial I have come to the conclusion that the only opinions that matter are the ones from those that sat through the trial and saw all the evidence. I pay zero attention to trial speculators.
Tanuki
(16,472 posts)It was highly stressful on many levels.
Paladin
(32,354 posts)The case involved the sexual abuse of a young girl. Civic duty, but a profoundly ugly experience.
GGoss
(1,273 posts)Paladin
(32,354 posts)The little girl had never been taught anything but the dirty words for what was done to her. Our guilty verdict didn't make up for what that child went through. Not even close.
Polly Hennessey
(8,881 posts)Second was on a Grand Jury for one year. Every Tuesday down to the courthouse. It was fascinating and depressing.
Emile
(42,587 posts)Zorro
(18,745 posts)I was the foreman, the case was a boyfriend stabbing his girlfriend (who survived). Eleven of us were for conviction on a lesser charge (attempted manslaughter) within the first day, but one woman was being so hard to convince that I was wondering if she was channeling Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men.
Sure enough later in our deliberations she actually brought up that very movie as some whacko basis for her holding out; the rest of us then figured out she was living out that movie in her own mind, with her as the star.
I was getting pretty exasperated with her, but I let the other women in the jury take over the debate and they finally convinced her to agree to convict.
You're right -- it's a jury of one's peers. Serving on a jury is an educational experience; there are so many other people living lives that are very different from mine.
central scrutinizer
(12,655 posts)And chosen a couple times. But at the last minute, plea bargains were agreed upon and we were all sent home. My daughter did serve on a jury but honored the judges gag order and to this day has never said one word about the case.
Kennah
(14,578 posts)I served on a Federal discrimination case, and there was no merit to the plaintiff's claims. Zero. I ended up hanging the jury.
shrike3
(5,370 posts)Foreman on three. One was a murder trial and the victims were police officers. His experience was almost identical to yours. One juror even said, "However the majority votes, that's how I'll vote. Whatever you want."
But I agree with the judge. It's still the best way to justice.
tavernier
(14,463 posts)My experiences were different from yours. Both times everyone on the jury was serious minded and involved. I think we all felt privileged for the opportunity to serve the community.
friend of a friend
(367 posts)to sit and read a book for 3 days since I was never picked for a jury.
EarthFirst
(4,178 posts)I have been summoned twice; yet not requested to serve after the call in process.
HubertHeaver
(2,540 posts)Two young men for forgery and cocaine possession. Case was clouded by one of the defendants previous guilty plea in an unrelated drug case.
Very weak case. The prosecutor apparently thought al he needed to do was point at two young men and say "DRUGS" and he would get a conviction.
The first vote was 10-2 to aquit. Of the two, one wanted the defendants to prove themselves innocent. The other didn't give a damn about evidence. The cop said they were guilty, that was good enough to send them to prison. The final vote was 10-2 to convict so we could get out of there. Oone of the jurors actually said "lets convict them so we can go home".
We ended with a hung jury.
phylny
(8,818 posts)for almost 47 years but have only gotten a summons to jury duty one time, and we were moving out of state the following week.
I have testified two or three times, though, once as a witness in a burglary case where we and other homeowners had property stolen from our homes by the same guy, twice as an expert witness in my field.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)and it too was a murder trial. And I too experience the same as you did with the other jurors just wanting to get out of there and not taking it seriously. I smoked with the Bailiff to blow off the steam. It was mind boggling that many of them were more concerned with how the defendant looked and the inconvenience to their lives to be bothered with actually doing what they were there for. Me personally, I could NOT vote to put someone away for life without much deliberation and careful consideration and rock solid evidence. The prosecutor DID NOT make their case. The ME could NOT tell us for certain the remains found were even the woman they were claiming this man murdered. So myself and 3 others voted "not guilty" But alas, 8 of the 12 were willing to hand him a life sentence so they could get out of there. We deadlocked and a mistrial was declared. That one has kept me awake many times over the years at just how casually people were willing to convict without a second thought of the human sitting in the defendant chair because it was disrupting their daily lives.
Duppers
(28,469 posts)That's disturbing.
GGoss
(1,273 posts)These jurors knew I'd drag it out, hang it up, do whatever I had to, if they didn't take it seriously.
So I made them tell me how the facts, verdict, and sentencing would be different if we came down with 2nd Degree Murder instead of 1st.
They looked at me like I was from Mars, and then they slowly got interested in that one difference.
Then they went back and actually read the materials the Judge's Bailiff handed out to us.
IOW... I made them do their homework.
And I told them such, very loudly, with a coffee pot in my hand!
I will sit here 6 months if I have to, I CANNOT and WILL NOT vote guilty and convict a 42 year old to life w/no parole when we're not even sure who those remains are. That is when the Bailiff came in and took us ALL outside so I could smoke and calm down before I hit someone with said coffee pot. The excuses were disturbing, he has tattoos" (so do I) he's an admitted drug user (so was I at one time) he's scary looking, he's not dressed like a decent citizen and on and on and on.
What I think most fail to get is, the job of a juror is NOT to decide if they they personally "think" the defendant did it or not, it is to decide did the state prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt with evidence presented. In this case, they did not. The Medical Examiner could not testify with certainty because they did no DNA testing on the remains before they released them to the family for cremation. You can't tell me with certainty the remains found are in fact the person you are saying was murdered, I have no other choice but to return a not guilty verdict. Apparently no one listened to those instructions but me and 3 others.
Both civil cases.
One verdict went the way I voted. One didnt.
I thought my fellow jurors were thoughtful and attentive and took their position seriously.
hunter
(40,761 posts)Sometimes it's the prosecution, sometimes it's the defense, for forty years now.
The last few times they've just sent me home soon after I arrive in the morning.
I'm pretty sure I know why, and I also know why nobody wants to open that can of worms. Something about a screwdriver I returned to the police station.
I remember the first time I was called to jury duty and landed in the jury selection box. The judge vaguely described the case and asked if anyone had been the victim of a violent crime, in particular a crime involving an ax. The guy next to me nervously raised his hand and the judge warmly exclaimed "Oh, yeah, now I remember you!"
Then he called the guy to the bench, they chatted quietly for a bit, both of them smiling in good cheer, and the guy was sent home.
It seems like I'm that guy now. But I'm dismissed with an eye roll and a wave, no cheerful chat.
No, my feelings are not hurt, and honestly I don't feel this is any great injustice.
Emily from Georgia is possibly a better juror than I'd ever be.
I've seen too much shit and its prejudiced me.
Rob H.
(5,865 posts)Criminally negligent homicide, DUI, drug smuggling, and a six-month term on a grand jury. Got called recently in the state in which I now live, but was dismissed because it was another DUI trial and the defense challenged for cause.
Edit: The grand jury was in Idaho and we actually voted to indict someone for horse theft, which still makes me chuckle because it seemed like something out of the Old West. The accused allegedly stole someone's horses and tried to sell them a couple of days later at a livestock auction about 5 miles away from where they were stolen. Not exactly a criminal mastermind, that one.
we can do it
(13,031 posts)meadowlander
(5,141 posts)Last edited Wed Feb 22, 2023, 02:16 PM - Edit history (1)
and ask for volunteers from the community to come be mock jurors for a day. They have actual sitting judges come to hear the trials and give feedback as well.
I've done it a few times and it's been a revelation. One was a murder trial/crime of passion killing an ex-partner with almost overwhelming evidence against the defendant but the jury foreperson refused to believe they could be guilty because she was a writer, the defendant was a writer and "nobody could kill someone on the same day they sold a book".
They film the jury deliberations so the judge and students can analyse them and they are all watching in real time. After that one the judge, who had never done one of these before, said it had been a real eye opener on the jury system for him as well.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)Once they jury goes behind closed doors, there is no one there monitoring/telling them, wait, that's not what the judge instructed. My case had two saying he must be guilty because he didn't testify on his own behalf. That's a constitutional right that you are specifically asked about during selection and instructed by the Judge to not consider before deliberations. Yet we had 2 willing to convict based on that alone. No attorney on the planet is going to put their client on the stand unless it's absolutely necessary. Which is rare.
meadowlander
(5,141 posts)We had specific instructions from the judge to only consider the evidence in front of us but one person who had lived in the same neighbourhood where the crime had occurred more than a decade before refused to convict on the basis that the defendant couldn't have driven from the crime scene to the next place he was seen in the theoretical amount of time notwithstanding the evidence that included someone doing exactly that.
I really enjoy doing the mock trials, but damn they are exhausting. At the end of the day you do really want to bang your head against a wall sometimes. And these are people who volunteered their time out of civic mindedness to be there. I can't imagine sitting on a jury of people being forced to be there.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)My advise to everyone I know, NEVER end up in the defendants chair because if you think those 12 people will "do the right thing" you are sadly mistaken. THAT was my take away.
Midnight Writer
(25,536 posts)and they were not allowed to smoke until deliberations were finished.
I will say that we had a skillful foreman who did a good job of leading people to a logical decision without losing his patience and temper. I could not have done that, because the holdouts were just being silly with wild theories that had no basis in the evidence.
RobinA
(10,478 posts)but never picked. Nevertheless, I found the attitudes of the would-be jurors horrific. Much whining about having to come to the courthouse and [gasp] park. Parking was no problem at my courthouse there was a garage and dedicated juror parking. Then complaining about missing work. Apparently, unlike the majority of Americans, all the people I was called with loved their jobs and couldn't stand the thought of a couple days off. Civilizations would crumble if they missed a few days of pushing paper.
The first time I got called I spent three days sitting in a lounger in the courthouse reading a book. That was rough. The second time they dismissed us at lunch time and I went to catch a very good movie. I get it that some people really can lose money, and for them I have sympathy. But that was not the majority of complainers in my groups.
GGoss
(1,273 posts)Our Courthouse had free/reserved parking for Jurors, check.
Maybe a voucher for the Courthouse cafeteria ?
Maybe you get paid a REAL wage for the hours you're there ?
Maybe you excuse those whose bosses will NOT give time off ?
Maybe we find people who are lonely and bored who are retired ?
Maybe college students could earn credit ?
But mostly, make it a thing of honor, a thing to be proud of... hell, a thing to put on your resume.
I want people who WANT to be there... to be there, ya know ?
Generic Brad
(14,374 posts)I recall being called twice but never made it onto a jury.
Liberal In Texas
(16,314 posts)L&E is what we call in the legal field Labor and Employment.
Lady thought she was inappropriately fired. Lawyer for the company was an ass.
Many of the jurors wanted to find for the company. I wasn't the foreman, but pretty much took over with arguments for the fired employee. Near the end of the day still a couple of hold outs and I said it looked lie we'd be back tomorrow. That changed a few minds and one woman who said she had to pick up a kid from school. Found for the employee.
Not a big or involved case, except for the woman fired for no good reason.
Cadfael
(1,381 posts)And Ive never even been called! It kind of annoys me really.
FakeNoose
(41,934 posts)It sounds like your experiences on the murder trial jury were actually quite different than what a special grand jury is asked to do.
First of all, there's no determination of guilt or innocence. They can only make recommendations, and it seems that not all of them are even asked to do that. (The grand juries normally would normally have no lawyers or legal experts in their midst. But they might contain people who have some expertise, such as a business executive for example.)
Grand juries have to sift through a SHIT-TON of evidence including documents, audio recordings and videos, as well as the in-person testimonies. Mostly they need to listen and sort out the stuff into what's relevant and what is not. They can ask questions, but they don't always get the answers.
They need to ultimately decide whether a crime was committed, but not who is the guilty party. A "regular" grand jury does issue indictments, but this was a "special" grand jury where no indictments can be issued, only recommendations.
GGoss
(1,273 posts)And I appreciate those that do it on our behalf.
Even if they're young and naive.
BlueWaveNeverEnd
(14,478 posts)Samrob
(4,298 posts)surrealAmerican
(11,901 posts)It was a civil trial involving a nursing home patient, and took about four or five days.
I was actually very impressed by my fellow jurors - people from all walks of life, varied ages, with widely differing life experiences. We all took the proceedings very seriously. Maybe we were an exceptional group, but there was nobody there who just wanted to rush through the case.
GGoss
(1,273 posts)You're not the only one here who had a good experience with a civil case.
Maybe it's because there was no criminal aspect ?
I really don't know.
Mr.Bill
(24,906 posts)on a murder trial as an alternate juror.
From 2014-2016 I served as Foreman Pro-Tem on a county civil Grand Jury. It occupied about 30 hrs a week. I was paid $15 a day and 39 cents a mile that I drove. I was retired, so it was not a financial burden. I volunteered for the position. I found that investigating was the fun and easy part. Coming to conclusions and writing reports was the hard part. I worry that the same is true at the DOJ currently.
Both experiences were interesting and informative.
Raine
(31,199 posts)ended up being a hung jury. I hated having someone's fate in my hands doing it once was more then enough for me.