My experience on Jury Duty. Warning...long. (1 Viewer)

[Henry Ford]

you aren't worth it...

Thanks. 

 

[Thorpe]

Interesting interpretation of the 6th Amendment 

AS long as it is impartial, which I would expect more from a professional jurist than from a guy off the street, where is the problem?

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence"

 

[Gally]

I can relate to the OP.  I felt/feel horrible after being a juror on a wrongful death case.  We heard case for a few days.  Deliberation came and 2 jurors were siding with the plaintiff, the rest of us were with the defendant.  (both jurors had spouses with medical backgrounds)  I was the foreman and leaned heavy on the 2.  Eventually they relented as they had nothing to argue based on the evidence/testimonies presented.  When I got home I called a friend who's a doctor and asked his opinion on the case.  He said that we were lied to by witnesses, as he said things that lead to the victim dying happen all the time.  I wanted to puke and still feel horrible about letting the hospital off/pressuring the 2 jurors to switch.   Our system has flaws and I wish I'd have listened to my gut instead of listening to the letter of the law.    

The problem is that the system doesn't really allow for "trusting your gut".  As a juror you are supposed to only weigh the evidence presented and then make your decision based on the instructions provided.  If your gut is jumping to conclusions that aren't backed by the evidence provided then problems arise...........especially if you get 12 jurors that all have different gut feelings that aren't based on fact or evidence. 

 

[Foosball God]

I can relate to the OP.  I felt/feel horrible after being a juror on a wrongful death case.  We heard case for a few days.  Deliberation came and 2 jurors were siding with the plaintiff, the rest of us were with the defendant.  (both jurors had spouses with medical backgrounds)  I was the foreman and leaned heavy on the 2.  Eventually they relented as they had nothing to argue based on the evidence/testimonies presented.  When I got home I called a friend who's a doctor and asked his opinion on the case.  He said that we were lied to by witnesses, as he said things that lead to the victim dying happen all the time.  I wanted to puke and still feel horrible about letting the hospital off/pressuring the 2 jurors to switch.   Our system has flaws and I wish I'd have listened to my gut instead of listening to the letter of the law.    

I'm not sure what real relevance that has, are you implying that because they have a spouse with a medical background that somehow gives them the kind of knowledge necessary to make a more valid medical argument?

 

[Foosball God]

God forbid my wife tries to evaluate some code because her husband "works in IT".

 

[squidrope]

I'm not sure what real relevance that has, are you implying that because they have a spouse with a medical background that somehow gives them the kind of knowledge necessary to make a more valid medical argument?

I'm guessing that they discussed the case with there SO and were told the truth.  

 

[Worm]

2 jury experiences, I think I've mentioned them before

1. Civil contract case - we the jury didn't "want" to convict, but eventually did so based on similar issues with the wording of the charges in relation to the contract. I was the foreman and had to lead my fellow jurors through the technicalities of the law and make them realize they couldn't vote not guilty just because they didn't like the plaintiff and felt bad for the defendant.

2. Criminal DWI case - This was similar to your case in which we had to vote guilty only if a few things were proven BaRD: the guy was drunk, and he was driving the car when it crashed. A lot of fellow juror's got hung up on the fact that it was difficult to see inside the car in the body cam footage provided. However, there were multiple witnesses (police, EMS) stating they pulled the defendant out of the car. It was a very "don't trust the police" time here in Charlotte so it was hard to get everyone to agree BaRD that the dude was in the car without a clear picture. Even though it was completely obvious by all the other evidence. Similar to this case here, I think it's ok to convict BaRD without a smoking gun, or a smoking knife in your case. Like you, we did spend a lot of time debating the merits of everything, and tried to do the best we could given what we had to work with.

 

[Gally]

I'm guessing that they discussed the case with there SO and were told the truth.  

This is a huge no-no for a juror.  The SO is not in the courtroom so they don't know the instructions or evidence that the jury must use to make their decisions.  Getting outside influence from someone not there for the entirety of the trial is a huge problem. 

In the large trial I was in last year it was on the news every night and in the paper every day.  I had to make sure I didn't see any of that.  I wasn't sequestered but I did have to be careful to not get any additional information that could affect my judgement.  If a juror isn't willing to do that then they shouldn't be on a jury. 

 

[DallasDMac]

In this day and age of people snapping to conclusions and "convicting" people on social media, the idea of having my fate in their hands quite frankly terrifies me. I don't know that I could ever be innocent enough to feel safe in front of a jury of my peers, i.e. common idiots.

 

[Osaurus]

Was just called again a few days more than a year since my last one.  WTF?  A bunch of people move here every day.  Why are they harassing me?  This is my 3rd time in the last three years.  

 

[-fish-]

Was just called again a few days more than a year since my last one.  WTF?  A bunch of people move here every day.  Why are they harassing me?  This is my 3rd time in the last three years.  

By showing up, you put yourself in a category of jurors that are more likely to show up.   Ask for a delay/deferment to help put yourself back in the normal pool of deadbeats and rabble.

 

[tonydead]

I'm up. May 29th. Already decided on guilty, unless she's hot. 

 

[Snotbubbles]

You don't need the actual weapon to conclude that a stabbing occurred.  You have victim statements, police statements and hopefully the prosecution introduced photos of the wounds.  All that circumstantial evidence PLUS the video evidence IMO would be more than enough to conclude that a stabbing occurred.  Beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't mean 100% certainty.  I think there's more than enough evidence here.    

 

[-fish-]

I'm up. May 29th. Already decided on guilty, unless she's hot. 

Weird to start you on a Wednesday.

 

[tonydead]

Weird to start you on a Wednesday.

dunno, never had to actually report before, know nothing about it.    Don't find out if I have to report or not until the night prior.

 

[Osaurus]

I’m here now.  Still teh suxors.