|
I was curious to know if anyone had any interesting stories involving jury duty. Any interesting cases you've had to make a verdict on? I've never been called in, but I kind of want to in the hopes that it's a big case and I could write a book about it.
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 09:55 |
|
|
I had jury duty last summer. My husband got it the following week with the same judge.The judge found it to be hilarious. My husband was also on the grand jury for an entire year a few years ago. He mostly heard drug cases, but his last day he had to hear one that got national attention because it was about a cult member killing a couple people including a kid. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
I was on a 2 week long murder trial about 6-7 years back. It was about 80-90% extreme boredom and 10-20% interesting trial poo poo. Funniest parts were one of the jurors getting booted for snoring during the trial and the lengths people will go to to not get picked during jury selection
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
I was on a jury about 3 years ago and in the end was actually glad I got picked. The case lasted 3 days and deliberation lasted 2 hours. I learned a ton about our legal system The case was basically a gangbanger rented a U-haul with a stolen ID and then went on a crime spree, stealing merchandise from stores, "kidnapping" a girl from a cell phone kiosk, and eventually ending when he ran red light, hit a car full of teenagers and killed some of them. heres a link to the story before the trial http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2006-07-26/news/0607260090_1_chase-crash-van We convicted him of 1st degree murder, which in Illinois apparently means that you knew your actions were likely to cause a death, not necessarily pre-meditated. The prosecution played the 911 recording from the cell phone kiosk girl as she called from the truck. She was screaming at him "stop running red lights, your gonna kill someone" seconds later he slammed into the car, killing a teenager and permanently maiming another. They also played footage from red light cameras showing him blasting through and footage from the store security cameras. Although the girl willingly got into the truck, he refused to stop when she wanted to get out. I believe we convicted him of a kidnapping charge for this. When the judge read the verdict, the defendant flipped off the family of the kid who died. At that point everyone on the jury knew they made the correct decision. Afterwards, the judge met with us in the jury room (or whatever they call it) and someone mentioned to him about the defendant giving the family the finger. He said that unfortunately he didn't see it so he couldn't take it into account for the sentencing, but he assured us we made the right decision and the defendant was a really bad guy you had been in the courtroom multiple times. The judge also told us that there would be a lot of reporters outside when we left as this was locally a high profile case. He said we should not feel obligated to talk to them and nothing good could come from it so he would not recommend it. He was right, there was A LOT of reporters outside hounding us as soon as we left. As far as I know, none of the jurors talked to them. The defendant ended up being sentenced to 45 years. Drheat fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Jan 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
I recently got picked for jury duty and would love to go, but unfortunately I had to send them a request for postponement because the semester is just starting and I am doing student teaching stuff on top of other classes & working part-time so it's very much out of the question. Hopefully they'll call me this summer though, being paid to get off work and sit in a court room all day sounds like fun (for me, anyway, maybe some people would think it's boring as hell).
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
Mine only lasted a couple of days. It involved assault with a deadly weapon and stuff. It would have gone faster but nobody involved in the case spoke English so everything had to be said through an interpreter and it took forever. The one my husband was on was about a burglary, but when they came back from deliberation to read the sentence they found out the guy fled and the cops were out searching for him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
They jury was split and a few of them decided to switch to guilty because they wanted to go home.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Taste the Rainbugh posted:They jury was split and a few of them decided to switch to guilty because they wanted to go home.  Jesus gently caressI had to sit in on jury duty once while they picked people out of a hat. I didn't get picked luckily, but holy crap people would tell their life stories to a judge for some unknown reason when they had a tiny question or answer to him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
Drheat posted:heres a link to the story before the trial "Police released the Kenosha woman but were still investigating whether they would charge a 19-year-old Chicago man who was in the van and with Lewis during the allegedly fraudulent purchase in Gurnee." What happened to the 19-year-old Chicago man? Taste the Rainbugh posted:They jury was split and a few of them decided to switch to guilty because they wanted to go home. Are you allowed to tell the Judge about this and if so, would it result in a retrial with new jurors? Jubs fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Jan 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
I was once empaneled on a murder case, but right after we were sworn in as jurors (so before the trial started in earnest), the defendant pleaded out. http://www.suffolkdistrictattorney.com/second-defendant-pleads-guilty-in-boys-%E2%80%9907-homicide/ In Massachusetts you can delay your service once for up to a year after you get your summons, so usually I just use my Dad's trick of delaying until the Friday before a major holiday. Nobody wants to start a case just before a long weekend, so you go in, no trials start, and then you're all set for another three years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
I got a summons a few years ago in California, my first. Everyone said, "Oh, you won't get called." I got called. "Oh, you won't get interviewed." I got interviewed. "Oh, you won't get sat for the jury." I got sat for the jury. Despite being a low-level traffic court case, it took a couple weeks. The state was charging this guy with driving under the influence, claiming the driver was under the influence of medication. While he did test positive for medication (that he had a prescription for), the state and defense said it doesn't matter the quantity, because medication affects everyone differently. The state's biggest point was that there was a big old bottle of pills in the car when they pulled the guy over, half empty. However, they didn't bother to enter that fact into their police report, failed to enter the bottle into evidence or even take a picture of it, both officers offered conflicting testimony as to the contents of the bottle and the state really didn't have its poo poo together in the case (the state showed dash cam footage of "swerving," and I'm pretty conservative in driving, but I had to really squint to see much swerving). In the jury room, we concluded that the guy was probably hosed up. However, it could have just been sleepiness. We couldn't be absolutely sure, so we acquitted. Thanks for the $11 a day, State of California.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
I got a summons about 4 years back in California while I was still in college, which I then delayed until December because I was in another state. The trial case was a standard drug trafficking case, which the judge went through over the morning. The judge then said that people who would be unavailable to sit on the trial should stay during court recess. I told the judge that I was going to be studying abroad the next semester and could not be on the case, and the judge excused me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
I got jury duty in NJ, but it got deferred because I was at college out of state and they didn't call me up a second time. my mom got it twice, and both times she just sat in the waiting room reading a book for 3 days or whatever and never had to actually do anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Also to get out of jury duty just mention jury nullification.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 08:26
|
|
|
Also to get out of jury duty just never show up for jury duty
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 10:50
|
|
|
I got called in for jury duty, went through the whole process to get vetted, took the day off of work, then showed up at the Court house at 8:30 in the loving morning (I usually work second shift so this would be the equivalent of being asked to show up at two in the morning) only to find a sign saying that the defendant made a deal, no trial. I checked with the clerks, because hey, it's possible that could lead to the world's silliest mistrial, only to find out that it was true, I had to deal with all that poo poo for no good reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 11:23
|
|
|
Jubs posted:"Police released the Kenosha woman but were still investigating whether they would charge a 19-year-old Chicago man who was in the van and with Lewis during the allegedly fraudulent purchase in Gurnee." I honestly don't remember anything about the second man. I don't even remember if he testified our not. Another interesting about this case was that the defense (public defender) was not trying to get the guy off, rather they were trying to get his charges reduced from first degree murder to wreckless homicide. Some funny things about our trial: The prosecution and defense lawyers started aguing with each other without addressing the judge. The judge took them in back, yelled at them (we could hear it through a closed door) that they're gonna cause a mistrial and need to act like adults , and then they all came back to the courtroom like nothing ever happened The Kenosha woman mentioned in the article was a sweet young black girl who was probably the most naive person I've ever seen in real life. She worked at a cell phone booth in the mall and the defendant approached her with his stolen credentials and wanted to buy a phone. She ran his (stolen SS number) credit and said he was approved for up to 5 phones. He said he would buy 5 if she promised to go on a date with him. She said yes and he said he would come back after she got off work. He came back in the U-haul, picked her up and then went to Sears and bought a refrigerator, xbox, and i think TV with the stolen credit card. Then they went to home depot but the guys told her to stay in the truck. They went in, loaded up one of those flatbed carts with tools, a power washer, and a dyson. If i remember right, they didn't pay here or the card was declined and they pushed the cart right out of the store, threw the stuff in the truck and took off. At this point the girl still did not know she was caught up in a crime spree. Just thought she was on a date. During they girl's testimony the prosecution said something like "so you agreed to go on a date to sell 5 phones" and she said "of course, wouldn't you" I broke out laughing and thought I was going to get thrown out. They also had the person who's identity was stolen testify. This was hilarious because because the defendant was a black male and the ID theft victim was a white female. However her name was one of those that could go either way in sex or race Drheat fucked around with this message at 14:28 on Jan 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
Mine was assault with a deadly weapon. There were no witnesses and it was the word of the alleged victim and the defendant. Due to reasonable doubt, every juror voted not guilty save for one. She 'just knew' the guy was guilty and didn't understand the concept of reasonable doubt. We couldn't convince her and we ended up a hung jury.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
I served on a jury last February and was the youngest person on the jury (20 at the time). A history professor at my college served on the same jury, which I thought was kind of funny (he said that he had served on a huge murder case 20 years back and wasn't supposed to ever have to serve again, but whatever). Anyways, the defendant had a pretty interesting, if kind of stupid, story. This guy had been driving his motorcycle erratically on the busiest street in town (it's a highway that passes through) at 3am with no lights on. The police get called, and they pull him over (since nothing was happening, a whole bunch of them basically converged on this guy). So, he was acting pretty normally, and the police officer was about to let him off with a warning, but the police officer asked him if he had a drug problem and he said yes. So then the police officer asks him whether or not he had any drugs on him right then, and the guy panics and runs across the street. The police chase him around the Texas Roadhouse two or three times, one of them's about to bring out the K-9 unit (like, the officer drives along side this guy as he's running through a parking lot and is threatening him with the dog), when they taze him and he goes down. When they cuffed him, they ended up having to pull like several 4-7 oz baggies of meth from his mouth (he was trying to hide them I guess?). We convicted him with possession, resisting arrest, and dealing, I think. (the defense lawyer was arguing that the guy was just hoarding meth, not dealing/moving it). This all took basically 2 days (the first day was just selection and being sworn in, the second day was all of the testimony and deliberation).
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
I wish I could do jury duty again 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
k4kk01 posted:I served on a jury last February and was the youngest person on the jury (20 at the time). A history professor at my college served on the same jury, which I thought was kind of funny (he said that he had served on a huge murder case 20 years back and wasn't supposed to ever have to serve again, but whatever). Anyways, the defendant had a pretty interesting, if kind of stupid, story. This guy had been driving his motorcycle erratically on the busiest street in town (it's a highway that passes through) at 3am with no lights on. The police get called, and they pull him over (since nothing was happening, a whole bunch of them basically converged on this guy). So, he was acting pretty normally, and the police officer was about to let him off with a warning, but the police officer asked him if he had a drug problem and he said yes. How in the hell do you not notice that the guy you're talking to literally has a mouthful of meth?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
He most likely took them out of his pocket as he was running around and was trying to swallow them. I have to call in starting Monday to see if I have to go in to sit in the jury pool and I'm really dreading it for a few reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
I've showed up four or five times, and all 20-40 of us got sent home all four or five times. One time they made us stay for 4+ hours before they did that. The rest we were sent home within an hour. That's my jury duty experience in MA. Exciting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
HUGE SPACEKABLOOIE posted:How in the hell do you not notice that the guy you're talking to literally has a mouthful of meth? He dropped a baggie as he was running, probably as he was stuffing them into his mouth. He didn't have meth baggies in his mouth while the police officer was first talking to him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
I had to get up at 5:30 to be at the courthouse by 7. Then we sat in the hallway for an hour. Then we entered the courtroom and waited for 20 minutes. Then we listened to the judge talk about the case for a while (it was a civil case involving some warehouse vs a paving company) and watched a video about jury duty. There were bathroom breaks before and after the video. Then the judge told half of us to go home. I went home and went back to sleep. My brother got to serve on an amusing case where it was an insurance company vs some guy who was claiming debilitating injuries after a little fender bender. Things quickly fell apart after the insurance company's investigator had videos of the victim, who claimed back injuries so severe that he couldn't work anymore, doing jumps on an ATV and running around not even a week earlier.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
I was on Grand Jury duty about 3 or 4 years ago for the whole year. Lots of basic drug cases, a few rape/molestation cases (one we actually didn't indict somehow). The best one was a murder case, guy basically got mad at his girlfriend's dad, and shot him 4 times on the front porch and 2 times on the back, the funny (sad) part was one of the bullets was lodged in the wall above the crib of his baby. The interesting part was my wife ended up on the trial jury for this case. The dude ran to Texas, got into a drug distribution ring, was caught and brought back to our county. The dude also almost broke out of the jail he was being kept in, by jumping off a two story roof (he climbed a fence, pried part of the cover away and went through). He was hobbling to his getaway car when one of the sheriff's deputies came back from getting everyone lunch. The deputy got out of her car, stopped him from escaping, and the dude fought back and pepper sprayed the deputy before reinforcements came out of the jail. Got him and his sister and another guy trying to escape. So the trial happens, and some of his family kept making threats against the court house, so they kept beefing up security. Fully armed guards (some in riot gear), jury had to wait before they left (like 3 hours) and other fun stuff. My wife loved it. The biggest problem with the grand jury was people could NOT get it out of their heads we weren't trying to determine guilt or innocence, we were determining if there was enough evidence to try the case and that's it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
When I did jury duty, the case was an assault that had happened at a party. It was pretty clear that everyone at the party (particularly the accused) had been taking drugs as well. At the point where we were finally discussing our verdict, we were all kind of on the fence because the evidence was pretty shaky. One of the elderly jurors said "Well, even if he didn't commit this crime, he uses drugs so he's guilty of something" and a couple of other jurors (all of similar ages) agreed that was enough reason to give a guilty verdict. Also, a friend of the accused who'd been present at the assault was a stereotypical toothless tracksuited dodgy Glaswegian junkie. He had run from the police who were trying to arrest his friend (the accused) and when he was asked in court why he'd run if he hadn't done anything himself, he shrugged and said "Aye well, I always run from the police." 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
k4kk01 posted:He dropped a baggie as he was running, probably as he was stuffing them into his mouth. He didn't have meth baggies in his mouth while the police officer was first talking to him. This is disappointing. My mental image of the cop turned out to be a lot funnier than the reality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
I was on a month long murder trial from October-November of last year. It was a drive-by shooting. These three Hispanic guys in their early twenties drove by another two Hispanic guys in their early twenties. The defendant in my case decided these guys were from a rival gang because A) one of them was wearing blue boxers that were visible above his pants, and B) they "looked Mexican". So he was mad-dogging them, they drove past, then turned around, came back, and shot one of the guys twice, killing him. They had actually lost the clip in the car, so they had to pull over and look for it before driving back. The guy who found the clip in the back seat and handed it forward (his only involvement in the crime besides just being there) pled to twenty years. The driver, who was high on meth at the time and not a gang member himself, just a drug dealer, pled to forty. We convicted the shooter of 1st degree murder with a gang enhancement and a firearm enhancement. The guy who was murdered? Not even a gang member. Neither was his friend. He was literally walking to the store to buy some snacks. His sister hugged us after the trial. As far as my experience of it all goes, it was both incredibly heart-wrenching and incredibly tedious in turns. Deliberating was generally OK, but when I disagreed with some soccer mom on some point, she whispered to the woman next to her "when she gets some life experience she won't believe X" and I called her out on it, then she refused to look at me or interact with me for the rest of deliberation. I think I said something like "I hope I don't compromise my principles with life experience" which was maybe more inflammatory than necessary, but bitch, you don't know me. For a month of service, I got like $250. I don't know how survive. I'm a small business people owner, and luckily my partner and our employee could pick up the slack. Edit: These geniuses shot the guy in broad daylight, with witnesses. It was pretty absurd.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Can I ask why it took a month if it was a pretty clear case?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
packsmack posted:Can I ask why it took a month if it was a pretty clear case? soap. posted:I disagreed with some soccer mom on some point, she whispered to the woman next to her "when she gets some life experience she won't believe X" and I called her out on it, then she refused to look at me or interact with me for the rest of deliberation. I think I said something like "I hope I don't compromise my principles with life experience" which was maybe more inflammatory than necessary, but bitch, you don't know me. This is going to be a generalization but it might have something to do with a rich WASPy republican.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
I don't know how well known this case is outside of New England, but I was called in for jury duty for the Aaron Hernandez trial that's starting soon. I got as far as being interviewed by the judge and both the prosecution and defense, and got dismissed for knowing you much about the case already. The whole thing was a little surreal, but pretty cool. If I could afford to be out of work for 2-3 months, I think it would have been cool to get picked.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
If you ran a business and needed to hire help, and it turned out that you could hire as many people as you wanted and you wouldn't have to pay them anything at all, and you could say "be here at 7am sharp or you'll be arrested", then you, the boss, could roll in at 10:30 or 11am, look at the workload, notice you had work for 12 people but 200 employees, then said "come back at 1pm and we'll decide who gets the "job", then do 3 or 4 hours of job interviews to decide by 5pm which 12 of the 200 people should come back in the morning, then when they came back in the morning (again, they arrive at 7, you roll in somewhere between 9 and 11), tell them "oh, he agreed to a plea deal... nevermind... you can go home"... that's exactly my experience with Jury Duty. If you suddenly told the judges you were going to dock them an hour's pay for every hour a juror sat on his rear end missing work to do nothing, the whole system would change in a heartbeat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 04:26
|
|
|
A Proper Uppercut posted:I don't know how well known this case is outside of New England, but I was called in for jury duty for the Aaron Hernandez trial that's starting soon. I got as far as being interviewed by the judge and both the prosecution and defense, and got dismissed for knowing you much about the case already. The whole thing was a little surreal, but pretty cool. If I could afford to be out of work for 2-3 months, I think it would have been cool to get picked. Shoulda played dumb you mighta got a sweet book deal afterward
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
Does anybody have experience just pretending that their summons never made it to their house? I'm under the impression that they don't usually send those things by certified mail. It's not like I would have a great deal of objection to performing my civic duty or whatever, but seeing as most places pay you like $200 a month or some poo poo there's just no way I'd ever actually go. Maybe if I lived in Quebec where your employer is required to still pay your normal wage when you get summoned I'd go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 10:54
|
|
|
packsmack posted:Can I ask why it took a month if it was a pretty clear case? They had to go over a staggering amount of evidence. I think clearer cases may actually take longer because they have more to present. Almost the whole time was the trial itself; we only deliberated for 5 or 6 hours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 10:57
|
|
|
I have been called up twice and actually been selected for service one of those times. It wasn't too much of a pain for my as the company I work for pays your standard salary while you are one Jury Duty for a given amount of weeks (not sure exactly because the trial I was on lasted Monday afternoon to Friday evening of the same week). It's part of the organisation's "we-are-good-members-of-the-community" image; the only rule is that I needed to give them the piddly cheque I recieved in exchange for my regular pay. The case wasn't that exciting. It was following on from a kidnapping trial where a group of people had held a woman hostage over gambling debts and tried to extort funds from her ex-husband and family while also beating her for non-compliance. We had to determine if two associates of the main kidnappers were guilty of d three charges; assault, kidnapping, and collusion to abduct*. We did not find them guilty of assault but did for the other two. I think we got the verdict correct. I hope so, at least, because I strongly influenced the outcome by simply convincing the two most vocal members of my pov. They convinced everyone else. One point of interest: One of the jurors was convinced that the men were 100% innocent because "she brought it on herself by gambling". It was a bit of a concern as the judge made it clear when briefing us earlier that we weren't to consider this part of the narrative and the defense lawyers never brought it up in their defense. Yet this juror still had to have every single member explain to her that this was irrelevant to the case before she gave up on that line of thinking. Amazing what biases people bring and refuse to let go of even when explicity instructed to disregard it. *can't remember the exact term or why it was different to "kidnapping".
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 11:13
|
|
|
Got out of a civil case involving asbestos in 2003 in Boston MA by saying I would be biased against the corporation (wasn't a lie), but I did it in 2011 in a tiny case against a guy who got charged with indecent exposure. Dumbest case ever. He was just walking by a bunch of police cruisers who were looking for someone, and a witness the cops had with them said "I think that's the guy" and the cops grabbed him. During the course of them arresting him, his pants fell down to his knees because he had no belt on. They realized he wasn't their guy or they couldn't otherwise prove that he was or something (that witness was not at this trial), so they just slapped him with that one charge because there was a family walking on the other side of the street who saw his pants drop. Boston cops man.. The funniest part was, during the course of the trial, the prosecutors very clearly stated that he was facing away from that family so they only saw his buttocks, while the language of the indecent exposure law, which the judge gave us verbatim, is the genital region has to be exposed and visible to the offended party. Meanwhile they are trying to scare us with all these ancillary details about the guy that had no bearing. That was the only thing I personally needed to hear, the rest of what they were saying was fearmongering filler. Same with the defense, she made a big deal out of the fact that they thought he might have a gun and bla bla I didn't even get what her point was, it didn't matter. The very charge the prosecutors were trying to get on him was something they clearly admitted they didn't meet the criteria for. It was mindbogglingly lowest common denominator all around stupid. So in the deliberation room, no one wants to say anything. The funnier part then was that I was the first one to speak up and everyones like yeaaaaa......and rallies around what I said and we were out of there in 10 minutes and then the judge came in and we all asked her how many trials that came in there were as stupid as that one and she seemed to agree about this one in particular, tactfully. Total miscarriage of justice. Corrupt vindictive cops sure, but retarded lawyers for pandering to the jury needlessly or for whatever reason they felt they had to do that. I'd do it again though, was fun. the worst thing is fucked around with this message at 11:19 on Jan 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 11:16
|
|
|
Gothmog1065 posted:I was on Grand Jury duty about 3 or 4 years ago for the whole year. How does this work? Wouldn't you lose your job? I guess the state could bar your employer from letting you go, but even then, that's a hassle for them to have a space to fill for a year. I'm also amazed that people only get minimum wage or whatever for jury duty in the US. In Australia your job has to keep paying you whatever they normally would, and the state reimburses them. The only time I've ever been called, the case was thrown out of court by 9.30am, but I still got paid for an entire day's work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 11:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 09:55 |
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Does anybody have experience just pretending that their summons never made it to their house? I'm under the impression that they don't usually send those things by certified mail. In the US, at least, there are usually laws requiring that any registered voter can be forced to serve jury duty. I actually kind of ignored my first two jury summons. The first summons was basically, "Hey, hate to bother you but we need you to serve in a jury duty because you're such an upstanding citizen." The second was "Hey, sorry, guess you might have misplaced the jury summons in your junk pile, we still need you to show up at the local courtroom X at 8 in the morning." My third jury summon basically amounted to, "Hey, we tried asking nice twice already. We're done loving around, according to such and such in the legal code you can be fined for refusing to serve on a jury. The fourth summons is going to be handed to you by a cop, and you can explain to a judge how you couldn't take time out of your busy schedule to go serve jury duty, despite the fact that every state has laws on the books against discriminating against someone serving on jury duty." Yeah, so once I got the third jury summons I went in for jury duty, and got dismissed out of hand. If you want to argue that you never got your jury summons because it wasn't sent via certified mail, well, good luck on your crazy quest. thrakkorzog fucked around with this message at 15:29 on Jan 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 15:14
|
|