-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
Jury Duty
- Thread starter Edog537
- Start date
I have been called twice. Served on one for a DUI case.
On second was a murder trial. During jury selection I was asked if I owned any guns and if I would shoot someone in self defense. Stupid question, of course I said yes. Then they asked me how many guns did I own. I told them honestly I did not know offhand. The prosecution immediately struck me.
This was a case that should never have been prosecuted. D.A. was trying to make a reputation. Everybody in the county knew the story and this man had acted in self defense.
Jury debated less than an hour and found him not guilty.
On second was a murder trial. During jury selection I was asked if I owned any guns and if I would shoot someone in self defense. Stupid question, of course I said yes. Then they asked me how many guns did I own. I told them honestly I did not know offhand. The prosecution immediately struck me.
This was a case that should never have been prosecuted. D.A. was trying to make a reputation. Everybody in the county knew the story and this man had acted in self defense.
Jury debated less than an hour and found him not guilty.
Walk into the courtroom and announce, "EVERYBODY GONNA DO SOME TIME TODAY!"
That should do it.
HDD
Well 3 for 3. Put on a trial for the 3rd time in a row. Now I get to hear about child cruelty all week. I did notice something odd. The Judge talked about a cross section of the community and all that but there were NO HISPANIC FOLKS CALLED TO JURY DUTY. I wonder why?
They really need professional jurors since the majority of us do not know the law as it pertains to any specific case. They should also not let jurors see who is at trial. There are still people who will judge those by the color of their skin or by the looks of the perpetrator in general. Their mind is made up before the trial starts.
Idk. I went in thinking guilty and hang em. By the time it was over just the opposite. This was a drug possession case.
The law shouldn't be so complicated that the common man can't reasonably judge it. Professional jurors is a scary thought.
When they asked me if I would set aside ALL personal beliefs and strictly follow the instructions of the judge (NOT the letter of the Law!), I replied that I could not do so and quotes Chief Justice John Jay in the case of Georgia vs Brailsford in 1788 where the point of jury nullification came in US law as a precedent.
Every attorney, the judge and the bailiff all looked at me as if I’d cursed and the attorney doing the interview immediately tried to shut me up.
I was not seated.
I was NOT trying to get out of jury duty, as it is a responsibility as well as an obligation. But I won’t set aside my principles as a Christian to accept the capricious whim of how a judge describes the law “as written”.
Every attorney, the judge and the bailiff all looked at me as if I’d cursed and the attorney doing the interview immediately tried to shut me up.
I was not seated.
I was NOT trying to get out of jury duty, as it is a responsibility as well as an obligation. But I won’t set aside my principles as a Christian to accept the capricious whim of how a judge describes the law “as written”.
QFT, and emphasis added.
If all the people with decent jobs got to avoid jury service because it would take too big of a bite out of their paycheck to miss a day, or a few days if you're put on a big trial, that means that "the law" of this state, or even the United States, would be formed by the input of only those people who were retired, on welfare, on disability, or otherwise have absolutely nothing better to do.
That's not what we lawyers want, and it's NOT GOOD FOR AMERICA. Our society NEEDS productive, mentally well-adjusted, reasonable people with good morals to serve on juries.
Update. After 9 days of evidence and testimony we may start deliberating today. It will become ugly.
