What Really Happens On Juries

http://walkerszivak.blogspot.com/2009/04/jury-duty.html

1) I can see why it takes 3 years to get a case through the system – it’s insanely inefficient. At least from the perspective of the person called for jury duty. I’m certain that the attorneys who apparently knew they didn’t need to get there at 9:00am as we were instructed to do had a fine morning. However, it would have been nice if they had told me I didn’t really have to get there until 9:30 at the earliest because they were going to wait for all the late people anyway. Second, it would be ideal if instead of having each of us stand and say our name, our age, our occupation and our spouses occupation they would have just read all that information and more on the 9 page form I had to fill out and send back. But then why would we bother them with such silly things as actually using the information that I was requested to provide? After an entire day of people being asked questions (which by the way had they asked each person those questions personally rather than in a group of 150 people I could have been done in 10 minutes because I didnt have the need to explain how I was really busy, or that my husbands business does such and such, or that for this reason on that I should be excused) I was set free at 2:30. Not sure what was accomplished by my sitting there, but such is life.

Read the rest…

http://ayellen.blogspot.com/2009/02/floater.html

But I’ve kept some of my old floater mentalities. They’ve come in handy, even in something as mundane as grand jury duty. Y’see, our jury is filled with strong-willed (read: stubborn) personalities. We’ve got the person who’s as far left politically as you can go, the person who is her equal to the right, the insurance salesman who asks too many questions and if he thinks something doesn’t smell 100% right won’t vote on a case, the pharmacist who has his moments of aggressive passive-aggression such as closing a window more violently than he needs to, the man who types too loudly and always has to open said window, and everything else you can imagine.

I seem to be the only one who genuinely gets along with everyone — though it’s safe to say I certainly do not like everyone.

Read the rest…

http://www.flickr.com/photos/joeywan/3229837800/

[Photo from jury-duty waiting area.]

View the image…

http://weberstudio.blogspot.com/2009/01/jury-duty.html

I had to go to jury duty this morning- my first time- and I brought my sketchbook with me. I’m a little rusty, drawing from life, but I got a couple of sketches that weren’t too bad. We were dismissed at noon but I have to go back tomorrow.

View the sketches…

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jenwaller/3136474145/

I’ve had jury duty since 12/15, and the judge is now saying the trial may go until 1/5. It’s a gut-wrenching trial. Why doesn’t the court provide a counselor who has the judges’ approval and who has been trained in not discussing the specifics of cases? I think the court needs to provide a “safe” place to talk about what gets seen and heard there. Really, it’s stuff that no one should see or hear.

I understand why I can’t and shouldn’t talk about the case. I understand why I shouldn’t talk with the other jurors. But hell. I really need to talk with someone. This is my first experience with jury duty, and it’s horrible and sucks.

Read the rest…

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1963544.ece

A JUROR was kicked off a trial after using Facebook to ask pals if they thought the defendants were guilty.

The woman posted details of the child abduction and sex assault case on the website.

Then she told friends: “I don’t know which way to go, so I’m holding a poll.”

Jurors are forbidden from discussing details of cases even with their closest family members.

The woman was dismissed after a tip-off to Burnley Crown Court, Lancs.

The trial continued with 11 jurors.

Read the rest…

(Via NevilleHobson.com, who links to other news reports about on this story.)

http://observing-skart.livejournal.com/59443.html

The Plaintiffs

“The Pacer” – the lead lawyer for the plaintiffs, when questioning witnessed he paces up, down and around of the jury box. Sometimes its like he is almost trying to find his way into to the jury box. He has a surly grandpa look to him, always with a grimace and talking in a bored tone.
“Sad Puppy Face” – He is the next in command as far as I can tell.. he always has this face like a puppy that just peed on the carpet and knows he is trouble.. he also has a pentition for staring out the window… hte window directly behind me, so it looks like he is staring at me all day…
“Pretty Boy” – He is a good looking man, and he must be educated (he is a lawyer after all), but he doesn’t stray from the standard questions every witness gets asked. I have seen him to anything else…
“Where’s my exhibit?” – He was the plaintiff lawyer apparently put incharge of interviewing the expert witnesses and their exhibits. Except between him and the plaintiff paralegal, they can’t find the correct exhibit for a certain line of questioning.
“The nodder” – The lead plaintiff in the case. Since the first day of trial has had nothing to do, so he usually falls asleep which causes he head to bob up and down as he fights to stay awake…
“Angry Bangs” – the plaintiff paralegal. She always has a pissed off look on her face, like she is taunting poeple to mess with her. There is so much hairspray in her bangs, I believe it would deflect a bullet.

Read the rest…

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article
/ALeqM5je6Pw1sViz24JRo9F0PNhoqMtzTwD94HGA180

“It was kind of weird,” said Colleen Walsh, one of the jurors who found Stevens guilty on seven felony counts. “Throughout the case, he was kinda quiet and you know, kinda grandfatherly, but when he was up on stage, he was like a lion, and he was kind of demeaning to the lawyer, so it didn’t help his case that much,” she told the Associated Press in an interview.

Walsh, 32, and Brian Kirst, 25, an alternate who sat through the trial but did not join the deliberations, said Stevens’ combative performance hurt him with the jury.

Kirst described the Justice Department’s evidence as “hard-core,” difficult to refute. Stevens’ stories “just didn’t add up,” Kirst told the AP.

Read the rest…

Also: Colleen Walsh’s blog.

http://alexvcook.blogspot.com/2008/11/i-love-jury-duty.html

[Humorous photo here.]

http://1goodfoot.blogspot.com/2008/10/sociology-experiment-or-jury-duty-day-4.html

I have decided that a jury is one big sociology experiment. You take 12 people who don’t know each other and have nothing in common with each other and put them together for days on end. Then tell them that they can’t talk about their only shared experience, the trial (which is full of so many things that you want to talk about, but can’t), and then you watch and see what happens…

Read the rest…

http://madeupmemories.tumblr.com/post/56676553/juror-no-4-just-so-i-can-talk-about-it-with-my-kids

- Lawyer to me today, in the middle of voir dire.

Read the source…

http://jeffsuever.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/jury-duty/

In today’s tech world and thanks to free wifi, I can do most of what I need to do workwise while sitting around. I will have to scope out an outlet before the day is over though. So, if I can do my job PLUS a civic duty, why wouldn’t I? I would hate to get wrapped up in a two grand jury murder trial though.

Jury duty-a lot like “working” at Starbucks…only the coffee isn’t as good.

Read the rest…

http://thewhimsicalbee.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/jury-duty/

…Since I am under strict orders by the judge, I cannot disclose what the case is about. As if they read blogs to see if people are talking about a medical malpractice case.

As we are all human, one cannot help but begin to automatically judge others upon seeing them walk into the court room. One is obviously dressed in an expensive and tasteful suit while the other is in a long-sleeved, flannel button-up shirt and black jeans. Defendant versus plaintiff. Money versus not so much. Upper class versus middle to lower. See all the snap judgements one can make in just a minute or so of observation? And of course, at the same time, I am telling myself not to do this in case my number is drawn from the metal box and I have to go and sit in the jury box. It is not conducive to being impartial when one starts to make judgements so quickly.

Ah, but isn’t that what we all do, every day? Judge others. And it is neither fair or impartial. I’m attempting to get a life lesson out of my jury duty experience.

Read the rest…

http://neil-hinkle.livejournal.com/97441.html

Finally, I can now say that jury duty is officially the most boring thing ever. I got a summons only a day or two after moving home from school and was lucky enough to be appointed to the jury for a case that’s lasted over a week now. The other jurors are trying as hard as I am to not fall asleep since we’re just sitting in those chairs and listening to them talk from 9 to 5 every day right now. We’ve all taken to just noticing things around the room that amuse us to kill the time, like how the lawyer for the plaintiff’s side looks like Dick Dasterdly from Wacky Races if he didn’t have a mustache and he sounds like Bill Lumburg from Office Space.

Read the rest…

http://rhiannon-black.livejournal.com/50231.html

Voir Dire continued not to mean to speak the truth. I continued to keep my mouth shut.

Except when I was yawning.

The judge continued to be amusing and pleasant. The prosecuting and defense attorneys were more than adequate.

And then I noticed something.

No one, I mean no one, was asking me anything. There might have been one or two others, maybe, who didn’t get asked a single question, but only just. I knew it meant something. Either that each attorney had decided for whatever reason that I was thoroughly unacceptable or that each had decided that I was just plain delightful and the bestest potential juror ever.

Turned out to be the second.

Read the rest…

http://adbroad.blogspot.com/2008/09/what-they-dont-tell-you-about-jury-duty.html

Yes, I’m serving jury duty today. And given the date, fulfilling civic obligation feels like an appropriate use of my time. (By coincidence, my husband reported for service 7 years ago today in this building. He was told by the guard there wasn’t jury duty that day. “Why not?” he wondered. “You must be the only guy in New York who doesn’t know,” hooted the guard. To which my husband, a lawyer, undaunted, returned: “Hey, Mac. I just got off the subway. They don’t give news updates on the Number Six.”)

In fact, jury duty in Manhattan is far less onerous than it used to be. Jurors commit to two days instead of two weeks which used to be required. Plus, free handouts! A dandy guide to restaurants in the area and a 26 page booklet (also available online) that tells you everything you need to know about serving. Except:

1. Check the exact address on your summons. There are multiple courts and if you’re cavalier about noting the street number, as I was, thinking that of course you know where the City Court is, you could end up in the wrong building, blocks away from where you’re supposed to be.

2. Don’t bring a camera. “Photographic equipment” (except for cameraphones) has been banned from court buildings since 2001. I did, in…

Read the rest…

http://marsgirlonwheels.blogspot.com/2008/09/called-to-duty.html

The questioning was certainly a little intimidating. However, it was mostly directed to us as a group, and the attorneys on both sides tried hard to get perspective jurors to agree to certain prejudicial statements, which several did. I’m not sure if they were agreeing to get out jury duty or they really were that thick with only scant facts about the case revealed. If I’d been asked directly, my response to some of these questions would have been, “I have no opinion on this matter without hearing the facts of both sides.” And it’s completely true. The type of case this did not draw any flash judgments from my mind. And now, because they’d given me some details, I was nosily curious.

There were twenty-four people in the room being questioned for the jury. As I remembered from the video they’d had us watch in the main jury room, I realized they only needed eight jurors for a civil case (which this was). So a good number of us would not be selected for the jury. Because I’d barely had to speak–I was never directly questioned–I was sure they were not going to select me because they knew nothing of my carefully quiet personality. I hadn’t raised my hand to any of their pointedly prejudicial statements, but agreed to the fairer generalizations. Since this was a civil case, they also pointed out that only money would be awarded or not at the conclusion, and we were asked if we felt that further punishment is deserved–that it’s simply not fair to have only money awarded. Duh, of course I didn’t agree to that. What are we? Uncivilized barbarians? I think they even brought up the whole “eye for an eye” argument. I couldn’t believe people would actually answer positively to this sort of thing.

Anyway, to my great surprise, I was one of the jurors selected! In fact, I am a full juror and not one of the alternates. Pretty damn cool. The case is still going on so I obviously cannot talk about the details. I’ve spent the last three days in court and I’m loving EVERY moment of it…

Read the rest…

http://geekoutnewyork.com/2008/09/juryduty.php

I’m in jury duty this week for the fine city of New York, or the fine county, or the fine state. I can’t tell. I’m proud to serve some government entity named New York.

All the jury waiting rooms have free wireless internet access. That might seem like a standard perk, but in the court buildings, which have all the modern styling of a ’65 Corvair, it was a surprise nonetheless.

Yet web content downloaded via said Wi-Fi is filtered according to capricious rules. One seemingly forbidden term is “games”: Almost any URL that contains the word “game” or might contain gaming content is redirects you to the New York Court System site without explanation…

Read the rest…

http://ohmargaret.blogspot.com/2008/08/view-from-seat-9.html

Before prospective jurors in Santa Babara enter a courtroom they are shown a 14 minute video about the joys of jury service. One of the positives promoted during the video is that jury service is an opportunity to make new friends. Really? I’ve been on a jury before and I didn’t befriend a single soul. Maybe I just wasn’t lonely enough. I suppose the truly lonely could consider inmate pen pals in addition to jury service. It seems to me that there are more unnerving than positive aspects to this experience. This morning I watched prisoners being escorted from the jail to various courtrooms. They wore orange or blue jumpsuits with “JAIL” stenciled on the back, and were handcuffed with their ankles shackled. The shuffling gait of their orange-socked feet tucked into plastic sandals was in sharp contrast to the longer strides of their police escorts, and the even steps of the lawyers and jurors hurrying to the same courtrooms.

Read the rest…

http://threadsofdesire.blogspot.com/2008/08/serving-justice.html

The most interesting instruction from the judge was not to look up anything about this case on the internet. There was some instructions in the beginning pamphlet about not doing any private investigations on your own, but now with the internet, jurors could educate themselves about various aspects of a case to the detriment of the trial itself. We should come to our conclusions using only the knowledge presented by both lawyers and their witnesses. They were careful to exclude jurors who might have too much prejudicial medical knowledge. After the initial opening statements I am strangely not inclined to one side or the other. I am looking forward to the witnesses who will present testimony on Wednesday and to hearing from the other jurors after all witnesses are presented. Everyone says they are openminded, but will that really be the case when we have to decide responsibility and possible monetary damages?

Read the rest…

http://jjb.yuku.com/topic/364418

It’s so fun to me! Everyone has to rise when we walk into the room, as a respect to the jurors. And for some reason I keep making all of my other jurors laugh and they choose where all the jurors sit and for some reason I got choosen to sit the very closest to the judge and the witness stand. I wonder if that means I’m going to have to deliver the verdict. Hmm. THAT WOULD BE SO COOL!

Read the discussion…

http://salvatorefalco.com/2008/07/21/jury-duty-voir-dire/

I was baffled at some of the questions he asked. They seemed inane–to a mechanic, “What kind of cars do you prefer to work on?” and to a pediatric nurse, “Do you like children?” On my questionnaire, I had listed playing guitar as one of my hobbies. He asked if I were a professional guitarist. Uh… no, that’s why it’s under “hobbies.”

Later, he asked several general questions.

* Do any of you have a bias against doctors? Several people.
* Do any of you have a bias against lawyers? An overlapping set of roughly the same number of people.
* Have any of you ever been party to a lawsuit? Many hands.
* Have any of you ever been party to a medical malpractice lawsuit? Most of those who raised their hands to the previous question.
* Have any of you had a family member sue for malpractice? Half a dozen hands.
* Have any of you had a family member experience malpractice but not sue? My hand went up.

Read the rest…

http://www.doobybrain.com/2008/07/19/the-grand-jury-room/

Until August 8th, this is where I go every weekday afternoon. There’s probably some legal issue with me taking these photos, but I’ll deal with that when it comes along.

View the photos…

http://bugle-planet.livejournal.com/4196.html

Was this even worth it for me? I mean c’mon. At this point I was starting to lose my patience, and with good reason. If you are going to use me, fine, use me; if not, then let me go home. After lunch I went back to the Assembly room and was called, yet again. Only this time I wasn’t the only one called. The whole room, about 60 people were called in.

Crap. It was going to be a long day. I can’t get into the specifics but when we were all called into the courtroom we found out it was a high profile case, and that they were very selective with their jury choices. Everyone was given a questionnaire sheet and had to answer each one honestly. After that, ever single person was called up individually and interviewed by the judge and both attorneys about their answers. From there they made the decision if they’d like to keep you for continuing jury selection. Think this was easy? It wasn’t. 35 people were eliminated before Juror #1 was found. Eventually, after what seemed to be a lifetime of waiting I was called up.

I answered truthfully and to the best of my abilities and was seemed to be liked all around. I was then sent into the Jury box. “This isn’t so bad”, I thought. I thought we’d start the next day and be on our way, wrong. We did another 2 days of selecting like this. And we are still not done. After we were done with the first part of questions and all the jurors were chosen, which took another day and a half, we were given a second questionnaire, this time about our personal life (friends, hobbies, and families), and told to answer that honestly. I did to the best of my abilities, and again, was seemed to be liked all around.

Read the rest…

http://chookyfuzzbang.blogspot.com/2008/07/jury-duty.html

While there was a lot of waiting around early on about 80 of us were led into a court room so the judge and attorney’s could ask us questions. Even though I was picked I was never asked any questions other than the standard judge questions (where do you live, what do you do for a living, what do your relatives do, have you ever been convicted, etc.). Others were asked more direct questions and I noticed a few interesting things.

1. The defense attorney, who was better than the prosecuting attorney, used a very simple technique. He asked people very directly the questions he wanted answers to. For instance, if they could carry out the instructions of the judge. Inevitably people were truthful. I’ve noticed this before. If you ask people very pointed questions they will tell you the truth even if that person knows they shouldn’t necessarily tell you the truth.
2. The attorneys don’t just ask questions to find out answers. They also ask questions to prime the jurors. All the eventual jurors are in the room so some of the questions are really statements to the jurors to be open minded and to follow instructions.

Read the rest…