No Jury Duty ?!

This morning I had to take off from work and report to be eligible for jury duty.
I was led to this room with other possible jurors.
It was a long wait wondering when I was going to be called.

The case involves a store robbery including a car jack.
Shots were fired with serious injuries.

Gotta look at this flav person early when he was brought in with other thugs all handcuffed together...look like they can have sex with each other given the opportunity.
Okay I will admit blowing it.
I pretended not knowing or hearing about it on the news.
( of course I did but was curious)
The lawyer for the bone thug not in harmony prompted dismissal.
I was excused.
This gumdrop of a lawyer was afraid I was going to vote guilty no matter the evidence.
Now most of you know I have a open mind no matter what's being said.
However I don't think it's fair for me to be dismissed quickly on the spot.
What a waste of time.

Has anyone had the same thing happened ?

Many are called, but few are chosen.

I should imagine getting on the jury for a juicy case like that was very tempting.




Quite rightly too.




Quite rightly too, again.




Oh, really..? I can't imagine what gave him that idea..!! Re-read your post again, up to the bit where you said he was brought in with other thugs all handcuffed together...look like they can have sex with each other given the opportunity.

That might give you a clue. Tip: Lawyers are smart.




Oh, I would have said it was exactly the right and proper thing to do.



I agree. The lawyer concerned probably wasted several minutes in the process of dismissing you.




Yes, it has happened on many occasions in the past, to many people, and will no doubt happen again, on many occasions in the future.

As a piece of advice, the phrase "Twelve good men and true" is meant to indicate those who have completely open minds, and don't immediately dismiss people as thugs the moment they see them, or make presumptions about them based on derogatory sexual attitudes.

Twelve good men and true have an instinctive understanding of the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Twelve good men and true don't tell porkies about not having read about the case beforehand. You told a lie to get on that case. Why do that..?

Jury service is a matter of trust. Society trusts jurors to be honest, fair, open minded and just. Jury service is an onerous, but important civil role which should only be undertaken by those who can be trusted to carry it out faithfully and honestly.

Ask yourself if you fulfill those criteria, then read your original post above again.

.

But if ever chosen, just remember - "The Law Is The Law" so that you can hurry out of there and enjoy the rest of your day off.

I absolutely loved Jury Service...even if i was put on the "back up list" of jurors.
And although i haven't had that happen to me it is quite a regular thing to happen.
The major factor in jury service is no matter how much you try to remain neutral you know you are there to judge criminal behavior/non criminal behavior.
It is an extremely difficult thing to have to be un-biased in this situation especially when you hear of the actually case read out.
And from what you have said you have already judged before the case began...

Yeah I think lawyers would be good at judging people in terms of character and so would have wanted people who are genuinely objective, considering the consequences.

I've never done jury duty before but I'm looking forward to the day I do. I'm interested in law and might get into the field professionally, so it would give me a nice insight into the process.

YOU LIED! You lied and pretended of not knowing anything about the case. You're already biased even if you keep an open mind.

I think the Lawyers did a good job judging your character. In fact, the fact that you think "the gumdrop of a lawyer thought you would vote guilty no matter the evidence" just proves that. You make huge assumptions. How can you possibly even know that is why you were dismissed?

Lawyers do not discuss why they pick one jury over another with jurors present. They simply ask questions without any bias or persuasion (or the judge would dismiss the entire jury because you were exposed to some bias or information you were not levy to). The lawyers deliberate with all the jurors out of the room and when you come back you are either picked or not, no reason given as to why you were picked or not!

And being dismissed on the spot is standard!

Obviously, it was a good judge of character.

Do you get paid for Jury Duty??if so ,you turned up and got kicked out and should have been paid,so what's the problem ???

Based on your description of the events, I would say the the "gumdrop of a lawyer" was pretty insightful and on this day earned at least some of the money he is paid to defend his client.

The problem is I didn't get the chance to vote guilty.

Since I'm on the list,there is a possibility of being chosen once again.
Depending on the case I will decide if the culprit is guilty or not.
Tough getting information if sequestered.

Who cares you got money for nothing Hey that sounds like a good title for a song

Right, so you're going to decide the defendant is guilty BEFORE the trail? That's the way to go. It's not the case, it's the evidence and testimony that helps with the decision of guilty or not guilty.

That's how it's supposed to be. There is a reason why it's difficult to get info when sequestered. It's to ensure your opinion is not suaded by the media or other sources.

Once about 20 years ago, I was called for a grand jury , being nosey like I am ,I was excited . I get there and it's pretty much like you described, a room and a long wait.
Finally I'm called and not 10 minutes into the 'interview' I'm excused. one of the defendants and I have a history .
damn the luck .

Thank you Judge Mathis.
However this was my first call to duty...there will be other times I'll get the opportunity and it will be hot time,summer in the city...