How not to avoid jury duty

[CastleBravo]

http://abovethelaw.com/Jury%20Affidavit%20Montana.jpg

[Task Force]

Lol... anouther way it to run to the court house and yell...

"I dont want jury Duty..." and try to get out of it.:rotfl:

[UnderseaLcpl]

My Dad told me that as a joke, when he was first selected for jury duty, he told them he was a communist. He has never been called for it since.:know:

[Task Force]

:rotfl:Good way to get him off it.:yep:

[OrangeYoshi]

:rotfl: That will definately get him somewhere. I'm not sure where exactly, but he'll be there.

My Dad told me that as a joke, when he was first selected for jury duty, he told them he was a communist. He has never been called for it since.:know:

That oughta work.

[Task Force]

My Dad told me that as a joke, when he was first selected for jury duty, he told them he was a communist. He has never been called for it since.:know:

I do the same thing with telemarketers... For somereason my mother & father always have to take a trip to alaska...:hmmm: Then the calls end suddently.:rotfl:

[mapuc]

A question from one who's living outside the states and have very little knowledge about your judicial system. I understand from what I have red, in this thread, that every common american can be called upon this Jury duty is that correct??

Markus

[CastleBravo]

A question from one who's living outside the states and have very little knowledge about your judicial system. I understand from what I have red, in this thread, that every common american can be called upon this Jury duty is that correct??

Markus

That is correct. Some consider it a civil duty. it can however be a hardship for some, sinse the monetary allowances are very low.

I have a better way of removing myself from duty. Jury Nulification.

[Task Force]

Im thinking about excapeing jury duty by being classafied as insane.:doh::rotfl:

[CastleBravo]

Im thinking about excapeing jury duty by being classafied as insane.:doh::rotfl:

Just say the words, "jury nulification", and you are as good as gone.

[GoldenRivet]

several cases i have been called upon to serve involve drunk drivers.

when the judge asks "is there any reason you might not be able to serve in the jury over this case?"

i always say

when i was 17 years old i was hit head on by a drunk driver - he injured myself and my girlfriend and totaled my prize ford mustang... i cannot serve on this jury without extreme bias.

works every time.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Im thinking about excapeing jury duty by being classafied as insane.:doh::rotfl:

Tell them you were a werewolf, once:DL

[CastleBravo]

several cases i have been called upon to serve involve drunk drivers.

when the judge asks "is there any reason you might not be able to serve in the jury over this case?"

i always say

when i was 17 years old i was hit head on by a drunk driver - he injured myself and my girlfriend and totaled my prize ford mustang... i cannot serve on this jury without extreme bias.

works every time.

I'm suprised that wasn't revealed in the jury questioneer, but every state is different.

[Task Force]

@ Undersealcpl ->Ill remember that.:rotfl:

[August]

How incredibly selfish of this guy (and the rest of you). Perhaps y'all would prefer a system where the state judges your innocence or guilt? Because that is what you are asking for when you duck your duty as a citizen.

[UnderseaLcpl]

How incredibly selfish of this guy (and the rest of you). Perhaps y'all would prefer a system where the state judges your innocence or guilt? Because that is what you are asking for when you duck your duty as a citizen.

Don't lump me in, I love jury duty. I'd be a professional juror if I could. I love all that legal stuff.

[mapuc]

That is correct. Some consider it a civil duty. it can however be a hardship for some, sinse the monetary allowances are very low.

I have a better way of removing myself from duty. Jury Nulification.

Thank you very much.

Here you must have education, before you can be in a jury
Only in freedom of the press cases, we have the same as you have.

Markus

[Task Force]

Cause some bosses aint nice and that one day could get you in trouble.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Cause some bosses aint nice and that one day could get you in trouble.

Pray that it does. Obstructing an employee from reporting for jury duty is not only a criminal act, but a ripe suit target. You could get all you lost wages back and more, and also get rid of that boss.:up:

[CastleBravo]

How incredibly selfish of this guy (and the rest of you). Perhaps y'all would prefer a system where the state judges your innocence or guilt? Because that is what you are asking for when you duck your duty as a citizen.

You have a good point there August. However the legal system in the US is certainly stacked against those who are presumed innocent. Not every case is of as much note as O J Simpson, and many are railroaded by the system (the Duke lacross players) because of the way prosecuters and the system is manipulated. Using the words jury nulification is but one example. Although it is the right of the jury to judge the case at hand it is also its right to judge the law under which the case is presented.

The lawyers of either side nor the judge will tell you that. So in my opinion they are already being unjust.

[Task Force]

I hope I get a a**hole as a boss... and juryduty.:o:D

[GoldenRivet]

I'm suprised that wasn't revealed in the jury questioneer, but every state is different.

i have never been that far into the selection process.

its very convoluted.

the elimination process is as follows:

1. show up in a huge room with about 200-300 people

2. wait about an hour

3. judge walks in and we all rise and go through all that BS

4. judge says "secretary... how many people showed up?"

5. secretary says "278 your honor"

6. judge excuses himself for 30 more minutes

7. judge re enters and says "if your name starts with A, B, C or D you may leave"

8. numerous people leave and now we are down to about 180 people

9. judge says "if your last name starts with L, M, or N you may leave"

10. more people leave now we are down to 130 people

11. then they start calling random names... "John Doe... you stay... Jake Doe you leave... Jerrod Doe you leave.... Jason Doe you stay.

12. finally out of 278 people we have selected 12 people AND IT ONLY TOOK 2 1/2 HOURS

W T F

from there - before dismissing everyone he asks the 12 if they have a good reason they cant serve on this jury.

all 12 come up with something usually... and 11 usually end up staying, calling one unlucky bastard out of the ranks to replace him - he gets his chance to come up with an excuse - if he fails - everyone else leaves and its over.

there are a few problems i have with it.

I had to take off work for 3 days once because of this mess.

the jury payment is $5.00 per day, the cafe across the street from the court house has a jury duty special lunch where you can get a ham or turkey sandwich, chips, a pickle and a drink for $4.95

at work i could have made $250 for the day if not more.

its stupid

[August]

The lawyers of either side nor the judge will tell you that. So in my opinion they are already being unjust.

Maybe so CB but none of that matters compared to the evil of a system where people do not have the right to trial by jury.

[CastleBravo]

Maybe so CB but none of that matters compared to the evil of a system where people do not have the right to trial by jury.

Like I said you make a very good point August.

[Onkel Neal]

Yeah, everyone makes a big deal out of trying to get out of jury duty. I was lucky, my job continued my pay if I were to serve (never did). It should be the standard, you go to jury duty, your job still has to pay you...at least 1/2 wages. Spread that civil duty out some. :)

[GoldenRivet]

Maybe so CB but none of that matters compared to the evil of a system where people do not have the right to trial by jury.

yes indeed this is a correct statement with which i think we can all agree.

however there is no argument in that the system has its imperfections and inconveniences.

Am i to lose $900 of work over a 3 day period so that i can sit on a jury for a DUI case for $15.. $14.85 of which is to be spent on lunch?

ridiculous and insulting

if you ask me the compensation should be such that you are not at a total loss professionally.

say $100 per day? :up:

the state wonders why more people dont show up for jury duty summons

its because they can make more $ at work, even after paying the fine for not showing up they are further ahead that $5 - give me a break!

furthermore - i see little point in calling in over 500 people when you only need 12 - 24 jurors

it was explained to me that they call in so many people because there is a high no show rate.

im not buying it, i have never gone to jury selection with less than 150 other individuals... 80% of which were casually dismissed simply because of the side of the room they were sitting on.

quite a foolish childish bunch of nonsense... i once showed up at 8:00 am and sat there until 9:30 for a judge to even show up... there was whispering between the judge and secretary for a moment - the judge disappeared for about an hour... came back around 10:30 am and just arbitrarily told half the room they were dismissed.

after sitting there twiddling our thumbs for another hour or so, the rest of us left after they selected 24 individuals out of the remaining 100+ people in attendance.

there has to be a reform here

better compensation and better selection processes

for God's sake - it cost me more than $5 to drive to the county court house from where i live

[kiwi_2005]

:har: At least he was honest about it. :DL

[nikimcbee]

Afew years ago, I got drafted into grand jury duty. I was basically paid detention. Actually, I got out of a lot of work. But on a serious not, I saw some really bad cases.

[August]

there has to be a reform here

I have to agree but it's a sad commentary on our social system that we can't afford to take time off to do the most basic of civic duties.

[GoldenRivet]

I have to agree but it's a sad commentary on our social system that we can't afford to take time off to do the most basic of civic duties.

i figure - they are going to FORCE some poor schmuck to do it anyway - i might as well show up... but it will always piss me off to have to go sit in that big room for 3 hours while the judicial system makes a game show out of picking 12 randoms out of a room full of 230 people.

its retarded.

[Hitman]

Perhaps y'all would prefer a system where the state judges your innocence or guilt? Because that is what you are asking for when you duck your duty as a citizen.

Well in continental Europe we have had that system work for centuries and the end-results are not worser than with Jury. In fact here in Spain the percentage of judicial errors with the Jury is significantly higher than with a court of professional Judges. Spanish lawyers have here a say: "If I'm innocent let me be judged by a professional, if guilty by a Jury" :haha:

In the end it is just a political option, though I admit that I have never seen quirurgical medical operations or constructing a skyscraper by a Jury instead of a professional ... :D

[UnderseaLcpl]

I have to agree but it's a sad commentary on our social system that we can't afford to take time off to do the most basic of civic duties.

That is to be expected of the state. Since it typically understands neither incentive nor efficiency, the current jury selection system is not a surprise.

Imo, the real problem here is the tremendous complexity of our legal system. It is all but incomprehensible to the average person. Both of the juries I served on understood little more than the closing arguments. I read legal dictionaries for fun, I was in student court for four years, and I recently passed my roomate's online law exam, and even I didn't understand some of what was going on. Working hard for comparitively low pay and no personal material gain is a huge disincentive. Why do you think the military has trouble enlisting anyone but the most dedicated, idealistic, or foolish?

There are few people that really respect the legal industry, and with good reason. Lawyers and politicians rank about the same on the "detestability-meter" for most people. No small coincidence that most politicians are/were lawyers, nor that both are generally renowned for lying.
How curious that legislators make laws, and are also members of the industry that specializes in them:hmmm:

The legal industry is a natural monopoly, and a paragon of state/business collusion. It has created a real monopoly by making it's product beyond the reach of anyone who is not a part of it. Institutions have been formed that ensure this, such as the Trial Lawyers' Association and the ABA. Not intentionally, but naturally.
I'm sure you are aware of, and perhaps share, the nigh-universal disgust with many aspects of the modern legal system, in the same way that you would hate a monopoly that charged exorbitant prices for goods that you need.

In my opinion, and in the opinion of many conservatives, the best way to avoid this kind of thing is to limit/disperse the legislative power of the state. Should such a thing ever be accomplished, it would destroy the market niche for extraneous services like a complex, non-productive, and harmful legal industry.

Though I share your sense of civic duty, there is more here than that. To uphold one's civic duty means being willing to serve the public good. Is the legal industry really benefitting the public good? I think it is not, but I serve, because it is my duty(and I consider it my duty to make an effort to become proficient in legal discourse). Though that may be admirable in the eyes of a soldier like you or me, it doesn't change the fact that it is ultimately harmful.

[Aramike]

How incredibly selfish of this guy (and the rest of you). Perhaps y'all would prefer a system where the state judges your innocence or guilt? Because that is what you are asking for when you duck your duty as a citizen.
Absolutely, 100%, wholeheartedly agree!

Jury duty sucks - no doubt about it. But when the HELL did we become a society of people who can't think 1 inch beyond ourselves?

When you use the garbage excuse about missing work, just remember that most people can use it to. If most people end up doing so, don't get mad when some pay-for-play jury locks you up just because.

[Aramike]

That is to be expected of the state. Since it typically understands neither incentive nor efficiency, the current jury selection system is not a surprise.

Imo, the real problem here is the tremendous complexity of our legal system. It is all but incomprehensible to the average person. Both of the juries I served on understood little more than the closing arguments. I read legal dictionaries for fun, I was in student court for four years, and I recently passed my roomate's online law exam, and even I didn't understand some of what was going on. Working hard for comparitively low pay and no personal material gain is a huge disincentive. Why do you think the military has trouble enlisting anyone but the most dedicated, idealistic, or foolish?

There are few people that really respect the legal industry, and with good reason. Lawyers and politicians rank about the same on the "detestability-meter" for most people. No small coincidence that most politicians are/were lawyers, nor that both are generally renowned for lying.
How curious that legislators make laws, and are also members of the industry that specializes in them:hmmm:

The legal industry is a natural monopoly, and a paragon of state/business collusion. It has created a real monopoly by making it's product beyond the reach of anyone who is not a part of it. Institutions have been formed that ensure this, such as the Trial Lawyers' Association and the ABA. Not intentionally, but naturally.
I'm sure you are aware of, and perhaps share, the nigh-universal disgust with many aspects of the modern legal system, in the same way that you would hate a monopoly that charged exorbitant prices for goods that you need.

In my opinion, and in the opinion of many conservatives, the best way to avoid this kind of thing is to limit/disperse the legislative power of the state. Should such a thing ever be accomplished, it would destroy the market niche for extraneous services like a complex, non-productive, and harmful legal industry.

Though I share your sense of civic duty, there is more here than that. To uphold one's civic duty means being willing to serve the public good. Is the legal industry really benefitting the public good? I think it is not, but I serve, because it is my duty(and I consider it my duty to make an effort to become proficient in legal discourse). Though that may be admirable in the eyes of a soldier like you or me, it doesn't change the fact that it is ultimately harmful.There is no doubt that the trial lawyers (and the legal profession as a whole) are causing excessive harm to our ideals. I read an article recently that stated that there are more lawyers in the STATE of Wisconsin than the entire nation of Japan. I don't really doubt this.

On the other hand, we must not surrender our right to a trial by jury of peers through indifference. People should be compelled to fulfill their civic duty in the most honest manner possible.

But, does anyone want to know what REALLY irks me? This a-hole has the gonads to make jokes about his dog's nuts in an attempt to get out of jury duty, and COMPLETELY ignores the fact that many of us have the same problems as he does!

You know what, jerk? A lot of people other than you can't take time off of work. A lot of us will struggle with our family's well-being. A lot of us feel our system of justice is flawed.

But we still do our duty as citizens.

To be honest, this is the kind of selfish person that deserves a royal ass-kicking from the rest of us. Imagine how great of a society we could be if we weren't picking up the slack left by idiots like this.

[bookworm_020]

I thought all you has to say was "shoot them all and let god sort them out!" After mentioning religion, it would be enough to get you excluded!:hmmm:

[Schöneboom]

My problem with the whole "jury duty" concept is that the state plays us for suckers when it uses the term "duty" -- implying there must be something wrong with you if you don't want to be exploited. If the system had any respect for the individual and actually cared about justice, it would call for volunteers, give them legal training and professional compensation (at least what paralegals earn). These folks would still be your "peers" -- but they would be better prepared and better paid for their time. (I wonder if lawyers would actually want smart jurors, though!)

I don't see how justice is served when the only people in a courtroom who get slave wages are the jurors. The attorneys and the judges rake in the dough, yet the jurors, who have the biggest responsibility of all, are treated like peons! That's what I call an injustice system!

[OrangeYoshi]

(I wonder if lawyers would actually want smart jurors, though!)

Probably not. If jurors were legally trained, it would be harder to call upon their empathy for other people. They would know the exact words and interperatations of the laws.


Jury duty sucks - no doubt about it. But when the HELL did we become a society of people who can't think 1 inch beyond ourselves?
The '60's and '70's maybe?

Well in continental Europe we have had that system work for centuries and the end-results are not worser than with Jury. In fact here in Spain the percentage of judicial errors with the Jury is significantly higher than with a court of professional Judges. Spanish lawyers have here a say: "If I'm innocent let me be judged by a professional, if guilty by a Jury"

Yes, but once you take jurors out of the equation, and you leave all judgements to state sponsored professionals, you are only one step away from the legal system of Nazi Germany. You don't want that now do you?

[nikimcbee]

I say we just adopt sharia law. It will expedite everything. Just think of the money we could save:hmmm:.

one machette, 1 blade sharpener, a bunch of softball size stones....

[CastleBravo]

I thought it was going to be a thread for funny/stupid stuff. I admit I was sucked into the serious side. Now I know.

[OneToughHerring]

I say we just adopt sharia law. It will expedite everything. Just think of the money we could save:hmmm:.

one machette, 1 blade sharpener, a bunch of softball size stones....

Or you could just fire up Yellow Mama (http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y59/breakfastattiffanys/Yellow_Mama.jpg)!

Intresting statistics.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/juveniles-and-death-penalty

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/mental-illness-and-death-penalty

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/us-military-death-penalty

Etc.