 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can you get out of it by claiming you're a racist or something?
No, it's your duty as a citizen to be a juror when called upon. If you try and pull a "Klinger" in an attempt to circumvent the law, you can face legal troubles. Court fines or jail, I'm not sure. Probably falls under "contempt of court".
Still I can see someone being dismissed for acknowledging their prejudices. I recall one criminal case asking jurors specifically if they had issues about race when the defendant was a minority.
Likewise a seemingly intelligent willing participant can be "excused". But you can't lie to get out of it.
Well, I'd say it depends on how well a person can lie, wouldn't you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Oct 3, 2015 - 6:41 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Solium
(Member)
|
Can you get out of it by claiming you're a racist or something?
No, it's your duty as a citizen to be a juror when called upon. If you try and pull a "Klinger" in an attempt to circumvent the law, you can face legal troubles. Court fines or jail, I'm not sure. Probably falls under "contempt of court".
Still I can see someone being dismissed for acknowledging their prejudices. I recall one criminal case asking jurors specifically if they had issues about race when the defendant was a minority.
Likewise a seemingly intelligent willing participant can be "excused". But you can't lie to get out of it.
Well, I'd say it depends on how well a person can lie, wouldn't you?
I'm sure some do and get away with it. But it's illegal, and if you get caught...
Myth #4: You Won't Be Punished for Lying to the Court
Lying about hardships to get out of jury duty is perjury. If you're caught, the government can choose to prosecute you for your infraction. Perjury is a felony, and you can end up in prison for up to five years for committing it. That said, the government has to prosecute you for that to happen and in most cases, they won't. They have better things to do with your time. You might think that lying just means a harsh scolding by the judge and no problems whatsoever. In most courtrooms, you won't get off that easy. Here's why.
Judges can issue orders in a court, as you probably know. When you don't follow that order, they can hold you in contempt. While contempt won't land you in prison for five years, it can give you a sentence for around five days and a fine of $1,000. Unlike perjury, you don't have to be convicted to be punished for contempt. The moment the judge holds you in contempt of his or her court, you go directly to jail. While you could lie and potentially get away with it without being punished, you most likely will be punished if caught. So don't lie to get out of jury duty. If you don't succeed, the consequences suck.
Edit: See Myth #5 as well.
http://lifehacker.com/eight-myths-about-jury-duty-debunked-1538152456
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
one lady said to me in car park "I could never find anyone guilty - what if it was my son?"
another said to me at lunch "I dont see how its our job to find him guilty or innocent!"
You couldnt make it up.
good luck with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
one lady said to me in car park "I could never find anyone guilty - what if it was my son?"
another said to me at lunch "I dont see how its our job to find him guilty or innocent!"
You couldnt make it up.
good luck with that.
I was talking to a guy who did jury duty a few years back, and he told me that as soon as he saw the guy's hair and clothes he just KNEW he was guilty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Oct 4, 2015 - 6:46 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Mr Greg
(Member)
|
And maybe ultimately it's the same thing ... a sort of theatre.
No - that's exactly what it is. As someone who has spent an awful lot of time (and still does) in a Courtroom, the theatricality of it only gets emphasised more and more over time.
Of course it's a very serious theatre where the course of people's lives get determined, but the impassioned speeches (where one inflection can make or break a testimony), the costumes, the patter, the pomp and ceremony (I do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth...and so on and so on....which basically means precisely nothing), the rehearsals (witnesses trying out their lines in the waiting rooms in response to warnings of questions), all being stage-managed carefully (Ushers and Clerks, who have a thankless job but are so, so important), speaking clearly and slowly (though this has become less of an issue recently since Courts discovered technology!), directing your lines to the audience rather than the person who asked you the question (in a Magistrates Court, or if there is more then one Judge sitting - for example in appeals)...
....the parallels keep on coming...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can you get out of it by claiming you're a racist or something?
No, it's your duty as a citizen to be a juror when called upon. If you try and pull a "Klinger" in an attempt to circumvent the law, you can face legal troubles. Court fines or jail, I'm not sure. Probably falls under "contempt of court".
Still I can see someone being dismissed for acknowledging their prejudices. I recall one criminal case asking jurors specifically if they had issues about race when the defendant was a minority.
Likewise a seemingly intelligent willing participant can be "excused". But you can't lie to get out of it.
Well, I'd say it depends on how well a person can lie, wouldn't you?
I'm sure some do and get away with it. But it's illegal, and if you get caught...
Oh, I've never doubted that.
(I think we parted paths when we interpreted Jehannum's remark. I assumed the person would be telling the truth about being racist; you assumed the person was making it up just to get out of service.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Having served on one jury (I was glad I did, and pray I never have to again), and soon to get called for another, I've started looking for comparisons of jury selection in other countries.
I could find no books in the library, and a couple of interesting links:
http://baltimorechronicle.com/020205MathildeSoyer.html
Short, succint, and plain-spoken, this article very nicely describes prevailing jury systems in parts of Europe.
It also is moderately critical of the U.S. system (and rightly so, in my opinion).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Oct 5, 2015 - 1:55 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Solium
(Member)
|
Having served on one jury (I was glad I did, and pray I never have to again), and soon to get called for another, I've started looking for comparisons of jury selection in other countries.
I could find no books in the library, and a couple of interesting links:
http://baltimorechronicle.com/020205MathildeSoyer.html
Short, succint, and plain-spoken, this article very nicely describes prevailing jury systems in parts of Europe.
It also is moderately critical of the U.S. system (and rightly so, in my opinion).
The US court system is a mess. However in theory it's the best system if implemented properly. The most important thing about the US is the concept of "We The People". The constitution was designed so "the people", all people, have a say in their country. We don't want the "state" holding all the cards, or making all the decisions.
A jury of your piers means your fellow citizens decides your fate not the government which are often corrupt and works in its own best interest.
That said, the jury system needs a lot of fixing. Juries need to be more diverse. Lawyers should not be allowed to lie. Judges should not hold so much power. Dramatics should be left out of the court room, and your amount of justice should not be based on how rich you are.
Furthermore a board of "professionals" can just as easily be biased, corrupt or just stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furthermore a board of "professionals" can just as easily be biased, corrupt or just stupid.
Well, sure, but so can judges and lawyers. It's not much of an argument when you consider:
Would you rather be evaluated by one that is a layman (read: likely ignorant of the law) and POSSIBLY biased/corrupt/stupid? Or one that is trained and/or certified and POSSIBLY biased/corrupt/stupid?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Oct 6, 2015 - 2:11 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Disco Stu
(Member)
|
They choose one racist bigot, one old guy, one cold impassionate intellectual, one poor guy, one foreign national, one uninterested guy, one embittered guy, one small mousy guy, one regular guy, one guy with attention span problems, one natural leader and one social justice warrior.
Main thing is, there must be 12, they must be men, they must ANGRY!
I'm very glad I live in a country that doesn't have the jury system. It's a ridiculous concept in the line of divine judgement, judicial snake oil.
D.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know. I hope I never have to find out.
Ditto.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
