Jury duty (very long)

[Zeke]

I went today (Feb 14th). Got selected for a pool. It's a murder trial. I could have given them a day. As it is, since I haven't been interviewed yet and they are dismissing right and left, I go another day and sit thru the worst tedium imaginable.

I have Wayne's engine book with me, but I can't read in the courtroom. I really don't want to sit on a murder trial jury. I'd probably have to change my finances considerably since I'm a one-man band carpenter/contractor. I'd be broke at the end.

I could answer yes to many questions that they don't want yes answers to. Most are traps, and if you change your mind, or don't see the judge's logic (which he has a lot of), you just go down the hall to another pool and start over. This could go on a week unless I can get excused from the jury. I'm one of the unlucky ones that are beyond getting excused to not have to fill a pool. Those people wainting to fill pools of today are gone for a year. I'm here until they hear me or fill up with 18 jurors they like before I get up there in the box.

Either way, it's another day someone’s house with no drapes and furniture all moved about so I can rip out the old widows sits all torn up and no worker there. I can't control delivery times without shutting business down. So, when jury duty arrives, sometimes it clashes with my prior commitments.

Two large orders have been shipped to houses I have under contract with a separate completion date for each job (it is mandated for a CA contracts to contain a written completion date, or be deemed unenforceable and invalid. I get no money for the windows or for the labor if I don't complete within the date, or at least pay liquidated damages.)(Maybe next time, my orders show up on schedule and all of the people are ready to get started, I blow off the jury service and send in the $250 fine. I'll talk and ask about that next time.

But for tomorrow morn at 9:AM, when I get to move up into the jury box for my interview, what do the lawyers and the judge not want? Young single men, worker bees, are out the door, first dunning. Then out went the middle age women who could say a man hit, grabbed or assaulted her and she has zero tolerance for physical contact that is not welcome and approved from a man to a woman. Stupid me, I thought it was ALL illegal anyway. So, I don't slap women around or even make them think I would. Young, stupid whiney fat chicks take the most time with their totally scattered brains, but eventually they go down the river.

What's left? The older stable men that are retired from good jobs and professions and that carry pencils in their pockets are good a gold. Just a few decent housewives could round it out with a token or two that can listen, comprehend and articulate in the deliberations should seal the deal.

I don't want this, I can't afford this, I'm holding up paying customers that have their deadlines for the painter of the party, etc., and I'm gonna throw that all out of whack. I do this work that I do. I don't send in substitutes for the "lone wolf."

So, there I am again as the lone wolf; I don't conform well. That might be the main reason that I have worked for myself, alone for so many years. In thirty-five years of self-employment, I have had 3 or 4 payroll jobs for other companies and none lasted over six months. One or two of those were temporary anyway.

Show me the way out the door that won't just shuffle me around from court to court for five days. The one question I'm looking at for a legitimate out is about believing if a police officer has been involved, taken a report, the crime was booked, investigated, held over by arraignment or by the Grand Jury, then did something happen or did all of those people spend a lot time chasing mice in the office?

Now, when this group of officers comes to court, they have a reputation for accuracy to maintain and they have most likely have been rehearsed before they come into the court. More so on the defense where witnesses are hand picked, rehearsed and told to tell a side of the story that won't hurt the defense's position.

Heres a story about courts and me:
In my own worker's comp trial that lasted 3 years, the defendant (My next door neighbor!) gets hurt at my house using my saw for his wood for his project over at his house. Occasionally I had paid him to paint things for me over at his house when he had time between his two other unrelated jobs.

So, he cuts his finger off and I take him to emergency. As it turns out, I should have just called 911. He wonders if my homeowners' insurance would pay him for his injury in my garage doing his project. I tell him, "No, I'm not filing a claim like that, how much did your surgery cost, I'll help you out with that." He says his dependent heqlth policy on his wife's job can take care of most of it except a deductable. So I offer the deduct.

He says to never mind it and comes up with an attorney and a summons about 2 months later. The point of setting this up is to show I've been in trial and everyone lied about everything. The charges were false, the events never took place, the guy had jobs when he said he couldn't work, and so on. I listened to this until it was time for the defense. Without jeopardizing his legal credentials, my lawyer set it up where I could deny most of the material facts and not own up to any culpability. I lied back at them as a countermeasure.

It looked good, especially the part about the jobs when the plaintiff was claiming total disability. I lost. They showed my why. CA Worker's Comp laws. Had nothing to do with all the lies and they just ignored both sides. I lost my house, filed bankruptcy and left CA for 2 years.

My point for the 2nd half of this little thesis is to demonstrate my utter contempt for the legal system. If I have to go into that trial, I will have a hard time being any kind of impartial, because I don't like cops (they are a different breed), I don't like lawyers (I've had a few and they all tried to cheat me out of more money, whether them working for me or me working for them. Yes, I said all. We just don't get along.), and I don't like a man who commits violence against a woman, not to mention that it resulted in her being murdered. And, I know people will lie about the facts just as they did in my little deal.

Hell, I can't even be fair and impartial over on the parts4sale BBS ! Help me out of this one and I'll go fix my car, post lots pics with grid girls and drive it like I stole it for you to watch, if I can get my camera working.

[genrex]

[QUOTE] Maybe next time.. I blow off the jury service and send in the $250 fine.
_

Is it too late to pay the $250 fine this time?

I don't know any secrets about how to get out of jury dury. Here in Washington state, once you've used up your two "byes" then you pray not to get selected to a jury pool. The jury-selection system puts working people's livelihoods and homes at risk, and that is wrong.

[greglepore]

Well, I suspect that if when you're interviewed you take the first available opportunity to tell the story about you're comp trial, ie you had a personal experience with the legal system that leads you to believe that folks perjure themselves whenever it suits them, one lawyer or the other will be sure to bounce you.

I did a fair amount of trial work, and tend to agree with you, but wouldn't want someone as cynical as you or I on a jury.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I think he's being honest, not cynical. I feel for you man, I really do. I simply can't understand why our court system continues to make life difficult for the working people. The best choices for juries are retired folks, the unemployed (of whom there are many), the homeless (of whom there are many) and office monkeys whose presence really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things except to their ogre-like manager who just wants them there out of a need for a feeling of power and control, not because they actually do anything important or significant. You know the type I'm talking about - the ones that are just conduits for paper and lead largely meaningless and miserable lives staring at the clock and surruptitiously sending cute / funny e-mails to friends to alleviate their unimaginable boredom.

Don't go after the working people that are self-employed, professionals, etc. FWIW I also think that jury compensation should be linked to one's normal salary, such as it is with unemployment compensation. It won't be the same as a day of work, but at least it won't be "thanks for your service, here's four bucks" or whatever (which will barely afford a cup of coffee and bus fare anymore). The cost of that should be borne by the losing party (in civil trials) and the general fund (in criminal trials). If the defendant is found guilty, the cost is borne by them through either work for the state or out-of-pocket as a fine. Enough of this crap already!

I went through this when I was living in OREGON (i.e. I had moved out of California) and was flying as a cargo pilot. My company paid squat to begin with and didn't compensate in the slightest for jury service. I called and (after sitting on hold with the various "wrong" people and "oh, that's not my department" bureaucracy pass-the-buck types for HOURS) explained this; I told them I could possibly arrange to be put on a route with a day layover in northern California for a couple of weeks and perform my service there if it was a major deal, but they said "no, you need to come to L.A.). Keep in mind at this time I was no longer a resident of California. When I told them this, they said I still had to, regardless or there'd be an arrest warrant issued. Bunch of a-holes. I finally gave up and just decided to see what would happen. Turns out I had to "call in" the night before to see whether I needed to report or not. I had to do this not for one trial or day, but for an entire WEEK. In other words, I went through a week of stressful hell not knowing if I had to jumpseat down to L.A. on less than 12-hours' notice and risk losing my job (if you ever called in sick and they found out you were jumpseating around they would automatically assume you were having a nice little vacation for yourself and you'd get fired - this happened to two people I know) or risk getting arrested. FORTUNATELY each time I called in they said I didn't have to report (thankfully) but I still wonder what the hell is wrong with our system that victimizes EVERYONE in supposed defense of a system that's "fair and impartial" and assumes "innocence until proven guilty". I'm not saying to not serve if you can. At present I work a job that I COULD get time off from and not have the operation come to a grinding halt (it'd make life more difficult for my co-workers for a little while, but they'd manage and I'd reciprocate next time one of them went on vacation or whatever). No problem. For people like you, it should be a non-issue.

And WTF is the deal with not being able to READ something while you're waiting? What the hell do they expect you to do? Keep running to the bathroom to whack off to alleviate your boredom? Stupid.

[legion]

Based on your story, no lawyer is going to want you on a jury for any kind of trial. That's the good news. The bad news is you might end up on a grand jury.

I empathize with you. I have several friends who run their own businesses, and if they were called in for jury duty, it would cause their businesses to fold and end with them losing their houses and declaring bankruptcy.

I don't think it would be good to draw jury pools from only certain segments of the population though, as it would mean that certain biases were pervasive in the jury pools. Not that this is really matters, as lawyers usually want people with those biases.

[vash]

i have been on two jurys. ZEKE, what i have seen is that they want people with really open minds. not saying your mind is not open, but if you really lay on your cynical side, i bet they show you the door with a nice, "thank you, you have performed your civic duty!". on one case, i seem to remember a contractor type, talk to the judge and he got off. if you show them your written and signed contracts, i bet you get a pass. they are not in the business of putting you out of business. when you retire, make sure you try to do jury duty. it is a trip!

[mikester]

sucks all around. The undu hardship clause seems pretty worthless.

[Moses]

Originally posted by Zeke
Heres a story about courts and me:
In my own worker's comp trial that lasted 3 years, the defendant (My next door neighbor!) gets hurt at my house using my saw for his wood for his project over at his house.

...I lost my house, filed bankruptcy and left CA for 2 years.

Good God! That's awful. Life, liberty and property are never safe as long as court is in session.

On a serious note, tell them you believe in a "fully informed" jury. You will be dismissed.

[Zeke]

Could you elaborate? I have more to say, but I don't want to lose the question if you go offline. (fully imformed). I know this takes your time and I appreciate it.

EDIT: I think a bunch of you regulars remember my dislike for attorneys thru this discussion.

[vash]

zeke seriously, 100% of the time, you can get off if you show that you have a prepurchased airline ticket. i bet you can get off if you show your two contracts.

[Zeke]

Originally posted by vash
zeke seriously, 100% of the time, you can get off if you show that you have a prepurchased airline ticket. i bet you can get off if you show your two contracts.

Maybe to the judge. Downstairs at the assembly room, they laughed at me. I had 3 signed contracts with one already overdue due to rain (which, in my case, is a valid excuse to not finish on time). Still, they aen't buying it.

Edit: Cliff, I'm not looking for a postponement. I've done that. An airline ticket is only going to get me put off until another time. Besides, I'm not in a postion to do that now. Seems to me, you would have to had made the reservation before the summons or face scrutiny over the issue.

Well, almost time to go in. The court convenes (see, I'm getting the lingo alredy) at 9:30. I'll do what I have to do.

[mikester]

Employers are not allowed by law to hold jury duty against you - could your customers be considered employers?

[Zeke]

Mike, actually a good point. First of all, my customers will wait it out willingly. Secondly, all contracts I've seen, including mine, have an escape clause for reasons "beyond my control."

That's not the point, though. I need the money and I want to work instead of sitting in judgement of a murderer. I'm not very charitable, especially with people (more with animals), and I'll rip any other juror to tears that exibits anything less that pure intelligence. I don't do well in group mettings as they all settle to the lowest common denominator rapidly and are dominated by whiners.

Put me in a jury room with anyone stupid, ignorant or just plain uninformed, and I'll be the one on trial. I have no patience whatsoever and anyone who has read the majority of my posts here knows the truth in that.

See ya. Gotta go.

[mikester]

Right there with ya buddy. I am a public employee and I can relate entirely to meetings dwindling to the lowest common denominator.

Seems like every day I'm at work is jury duty...

[Moses]

Originally posted by Zeke
Could you elaborate? I have more to say, but I don't want to lose the question if you go offline. (fully imformed). I know this takes your time and I appreciate it.

EDIT: I think a bunch of you regulars remember my dislike for attorneys thru this discussion.

Our legal system was designed originally so that the jury would make two distinct judgements on each case;

1) Guilty or innocent
2) Whether or not they think the law was appropriately applied.

Example; Before the civil war, it was illegal to harbor runaway slaves in the border states. Participants in the underground railroad were often arrested and tried. A typical result was that the jury would conclude that the accused was guilty, but they disagreed with the law and felt they should never have been charged. The accused, although guilty, went free. The "fully informed" jury was thought to be an essential tool that helped protect citizens from bad laws or abusive application.

Remember Ellie Nessler? She shot and killed her sons molester in the courtroom. The accused had a long history of sexual abuse. If we still had "fully informed" jurys, they could have found Ellie guilty of the shooting, but declare that she should never have been charged. She would have been set free.

Anyway, today "fully informed jury" is perceived as "jury nullification". Just mention it and you will be excused.

[Deschodt]

I think a lot of countries do not use the same jury system as we do here... Anybody got any experience / info on that ? I think some use professional jurors, some are just using a panel of judges - basically the same thing - panel of pros who've been to lots of trials and decide at a majority ...

While it may sound scary on the surface, I think that if you are innocent, you'd prefer to get judged by professionals who do this for a living and have seen the good, the bad and the ugly, rather than take a chance with a jury selected God knows how from God knows where, especially given how the smart people manage to avoid getting picked !

Think OJ might have gotten off with a professional jury or a panel or judges ? ;-)

I dunno - opinions ?

[greglepore]

Let us know how it all works out.

[island911]

Originally posted by Zeke
. . . . and I'll rip any other juror to tears that exibits anything less that pure intelligence. ..
Put me in a jury room with anyone stupid, ignorant or just plain uninformed, and I'll be the one on trial. I have no patience whatsoever and anyone who has read the majority of my posts here knows the truth in that.

ya got that right.

I feel for ya Zeke. There have been a few other jury Duty Threads

[sjp_30188]

everytime Ive been called for Jury duty, I just saw derogatory things about lawyers when I expound on every answer I give. I say truthful things rather than hurtful things, but its gotten me of being selected everytime.

[legion]

You'd think there'd be more lawyers chiming in on Porsche/BMW board...