by Datechguy | July 5th, 2011
I can’t pretend that I know much about this case, I didn’t follow it, I don’t know the background or the evidence, but I saw the verdict today while I was having lunch on a long hot day and everywhere I went and everywhere on the radio people were outraged.
Again I don’t know the truth of the matter but I do have a question for all those outraged people:
The last time you were summoned to Jury did you go or did you look for an excuse to duck it?
Just about everyone I know tends to try to duck jury duty; they always seem to find one excuse or another to leave the task to someone else.
I’ve often said we get the government we deserve, it is my firm belief we also get the justice system we deserve. If you don’t like the way the justice system works perhaps the next time you are asked to participate remember how you thought about this case and act accordingly.
Update: Had a bad day yesterday (a bit my fault) and hit the sack kinda meh. And woke to an Instalanche and a bunch of comments to moderate. Welcome on over. If you have an interest in the 4th of July in Fitchburg, click here. If you want to hear a cute story about a the greatest garden in town, click here. And keep and eye of Ca-36, might be some surprises there.
Update: Linked by my No One of Any Important who had the base Instalanche (well deserved too) and a great debate in comments on Jury Duty. I’ve always gone but now that I’m self-employed and a one man band, could I really afford financially to go anymore until I’m much bigger?
I’ve only been called once, and to my surprise, I got picked for a jury in a criminal trial. It was a fascinating process and I would happily do it again, as long as I was working for an employer that would continue to pay my salary while I wasn’t actually working.
Everyone on my jury took it very seriously and I think we did a good job. I found it most interesting to watch the accused while the witnesses were testifying. He kept reminding me of something I read somewhere once about “the smooth wet eyes of the sociopath” which I know isn’t relevant, but what was relevant was the ridiculous story he and his “girlfriend” (the victim in the case) cooked up to try to blame the whole thing on a neighbor. It was so ridiculous that no one had any problem believing the neighbor in spite of his obvious prison tattoos.
I would happily do this again just because it’s very interesting.
Last time I got a jury summons I ducked it with the flimsy excuse that I didn’t actually live in the county served by that court. They had my current address, too, but apparently keeping track of what addresses actually fall in their jurisdiction was too complicated for our legal system.
I’ll admit that jury duty is not my favorite pastime, although I always go when summoned. I was only on 1 jury out of 5 or 6 duties, and probably 10 to 12 times getting to voir dire.
The fact that my father was once a cop probably disqualifies me the most.
I’d really like for the system to just take the first 12 people in line, and as long as they aren’t a party to the case, let them serve. People are pretty complex, and as much as lawyers will try to place people in silos, we can usually think for ourselves.
I’ve been called for jury duty twice. Excused the first time because I worked as a legal secretary (and presumably knew too much about how it all works). Excused the second time because I read the newspaper, and had read about the case when it happened (it was a particularly heinous crime and I remembered reading about it a decade earlier).
Attorneys generally do not want knowledgeable people on juries.
Sorry about that I should have given you the link to the specific post.
http://realbrother.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/the-backwords-world-of-datetechguy/
OT-Is this buy talking about you? Some black racist ranting about “DateTechGuy”.
http://realbrother.wordpress.com/
I always go and do my jury duty but I’ve only had to serve on 1 civil case. To those who say they can’t because of whatever inconvenience then they should forfeit their rights to a trial by jury.
Served in 2002. Will confess I hoped not to be empaneled. Once on a jury, though, I found it fascinating. Was gratified at how seriously and thoughtfully people took it. There was a strong desire to get it right. Worth the two days it toook.
I too served on a jury that handled a murder trial. Having been a journalist for 20+ years I’ve covered many trials, but sitting on the jury was so different. We literally felt the weight of our responsibility. And I was glad we did, after all the 12 of us held the life of a young man in our hands. In the end we did find him guilty and he was sentenced to 25 to life for killing a young girl who happened to be sitting next to his intended target. Voting yes was probably the most serious decision I have ever made in my life.
I have been called as a juror about 8 times, served on a trial twice. The last time was different, because of things I’ve learned since the last time I served. Missouri requires jurors to take an oath that they will only judge the case on the facts. At the end of the judge’s discussion about juror responsibility, he discussed the oath and asked if anyone would have a problem taking it. I raised my hand, and he inquired. I said it would probably be best discussed at the bench, he called me up. In front of the prosecutor, the defense attorney and the judge, I stated that I believe I have the right, and the duty, to judge both the facts of the case and the law. I was dismissed for cause and have not been called in more than ten years, when I used to be called every three or 4. If I could afford to throw money at the issue, I’d like to hire a lawyer to contest the juror’s oath.
I don’t duck jury duty. I find it very interesting. I’ve served on 2 juries–one criminal (petty drug dealing) and one civil (med malpractice). Both times I was very impressed by the jury. Emotional arguments were put forth by some, but the juries navigated thru the non-substance and got focused on the substance of the cases and, I believe, arrived at the proper verdicts.
I’ve been rejected many times to be a juror. This part of the system needs work, as it is many people’s only direct involvement with the justice system. What they see is rampant prejudice run wild. I believe that jurors should be selected at random, and if they are not related to any of the parties, have no involvement in the case or firsthand knowledge of it, then they remain on the jury.
Peter, there’s another factor that hasn’t been considered; call it the Nifong effect.
There was a commenter over at RSM’s place who claimed to have been a witness at multiple trials because he worked as an ER physician, and he claimed to have lied in many of them to help the prosecution. Everyone saw how Mike Niufong was prepared to lie and suppress evidence in the name of politics and PC. From the suppression of evidence in various shootings by cops in Las Vegas, Pima County AZ, etc., to the Cory Mayes case. we’ve received graphic demonstrations of what the “Blue Wall of silence” means in terms of cops getting away, literally, with murder.
The problem isn’t that the jury pool in this country expects everything to work like CSI, the problem is that they are well aware that unlike CSI or Law and Order, the criminal justice system ain’t honest cops and fearless prosecutors who are willing and eager to prosecute the bad apples and defend the innocent. Instead, it’s a world of go along to get along and closing your eyes to outright lawbreaking.
And those cases have also made them more aware that even good, middle class citizens who have never broken the law in their lives, not just gang members who surely did SOMETHING they should have been punished for, are going to get screwed unless they, the jury, stop it.
Might change the definition of “reasonable doubt”, no?
” I will default to the latter nearly every time.”
” nearly every time” implies that there are some time you agree with Nancy Grace? Would you want her on your jury? I sure as hell wouldn’t.
I’ve served on two juries, one civil and one criminal. Considering that my military career was as a criminal investigator being selected was kind of a shock to me.
I feel I was fair in my deliberations (guilty in the civil, innocent in the criminal) and I learned to question evidence that , as an investigator, I might not have.
Only half-jokingly many law enforcement officers make comments that “he must be guilty, we don’t investigate innocent people.”
Only we do. And a jury is the last chance to correct those mistakes.
Recently I learned a new phrase “jury nullification.” According to Wiki jury nullification is “…A jury verdict contrary to the letter of the law pertains only to the particular case before it; however, if a pattern of acquittals develops in response to repeated attempts to prosecute a statutory offence, it can have the de facto effect of invalidating the statute. A pattern of jury nullification may indicate public opposition to an unwanted legislative enactment”
Juries have power that they often are unaware of and sometimes use it in ways that defy the law and especially the judge.
Always answer the call for jury duty, it’s important.
I wasn’t referring to Nancy Grace personally. I was using her as a symbol of the MSM in general.
I actually had originally typed, “every time”, but realized it was too restrictive before submitting. It was jury nullification that was on my mind when I changed it. Although usually unjustly executed with raw emotion (e.g. OJ Simpson) , there are occasions where the enforcement of the letter of the law can violate the express intent of the same law. At such (exceedingly rare) occasions, the facts for a specific case may have to take a back seat to justice and common sense.
But I don’t think this is the path Da Tech Guy was intending us to trod with his post.
Sometimes there’s more to it than that. By luck of the draw I was called to jury duty 5 times in one 5-year period (in CA) and all five times happened to get as far as voir dire. All 5 times I was bumped immediately — and I mean immediately — after I was asked what my husband did for a living (He is a Baptist minister). Sometimes I was bumped by the prosecutor; sometimes by the defense atty.
I am presentable, intelligent, open-minded, compassionate and reasonable. I’m not easily shocked. But apparently my “jury profile” runs afoul of some lawyer’s master strategy all too often.
The better question to ask is this: When did jury selection become so cynical and unnuanced? By the time the typical jury has been sworn in, it has often been dumbed down and many of the “peers” who would have been happy to do their civic duty in a conscientious and fair way have been booted?
The one thing the public knew for sure from the media coverage was that Casey Anthony was lying, and she was convicted on those charges.
The question now is whether someone else was involved, and whether these acquitals and convictions will provide any leverage to get Casey to finally tell the truth. Probably not.
I often say that our system, today, guarantees you a jury of 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty. You do get 2 or 3 civil servants usually (a different sort of mental deficiency) and the occasional idiot like me who sees it as part of citizenship, but most people try to duck so that someone who has the time to do this can take their place. It’s even cost me work, believe or not.
No, I have never tried to duck jury duty, nor has my wife. She actually served on a jury at trial once. I was put into voir dire once, but apparently the attorneys found me unsuitable. It was a medical malpractice suit. I have degrees in Biology and Biochemistry, I have relatives managing hospitals, and I got my Biology degree at the same school one of the physician defendants got their undergraduate degree, so probably both sides found reasons to get rid of me. They don’t want someone on a jury who can or will draw from any of their own expertise. All they want you to consider in a deliberation is what the lawyers tell you.
Tragic and deserving of justice for everybody but Caylee.
Understood.
As a self-employed professional who has contractual and ethical obligation to my clients I’m not in a position to just stop and shut down my officer for several weeks or longer for a lengthy trial. As a sole-practitioner I have no back-stop, I have to both be available…and deliver my professional services when contractually promised.
Plus the tiny stipend of compensation paid by the courts in no-way compensates for the lost billings and business revenue needed to meet my contractual obligations, nor my personal expenses. Last time they called me I was offered $17/day which would not have even paid my travel expenses to the Courthouse and the parking garage.
Do I try to duck Jury Duty? You think I’m an idiot to answer this PUBLICLY? If the answer is yes, then you have no concept of how far the total surveillance society has evolved and how disastrous telling the truth can be when dealing with THE AUTHORITIES of THE SYSTEM.
Jeez.
And btw – Belvin Perry is to blame for this atrocity. Talk about a buffoon who was out of his depth every step of the way, allowing the Defense to fling any sort of unsubstantiated allegation into the mix as if it were bona fide evidence. The man ought to be disbarred.
Because, by his dull-wittedness, he has almost single handedly guaranteed father George Anthony will now be tried for criminal acts relative to Caylee’s death … because the Court he presided over has cast reasonable doubt upon him!
Thanks Casey! Thanks Baez! Thanks a lot Perry!
I served last summer and always poke my friends to serve if they get the chance.
However, seeing the sausage making from the inside I’d take a jury trial if I ever was in trouble that way. It would be a good statistic to see what percent of crimes find someone to prosecute, what percent of those the DA tries and what percent are found guilty.
In Wisconsin in 2009, 26% of robberies were cleared by arrest and only 16% of auto thefts were cleared through arrests.
I only checked in at the end. The prosecution case sucked. All the defense had to do was to provide a semi-plausible reason for her obvious lies and behaviors. They essentially did this via the old “throw crap against the wall and hope some sticks.” It worked. The prosecution didn’t prove their case. I don’t know why. Maybe they didn’t have good evidence. Maybe the evidence and/or the case was botched. Maybe the prosecutors are dummies.
And as for jury duty, my wife and I both go and have served on juries at some expense [time lost on the job even if you get paid, for instance]. She served on a nasty child molestation case for 7 days and I served 26 days on a $100 million ‘bad baby’ case. [I teach at a state university and juggled like crazy to meet my teaching commitments. She does statistical work and essentially had two full-time jobs for a week.]
My wife still worries if her trial was decided properly. It was very difficult. In my case, I really know too much, and I think the outcome was wrong under the law but essentially as close to what should happen as was likely.
We’ll serve next time, too, but I hope it isn’t for so long.
The last time you were summoned to Jury did you go or did you look for an excuse to duck it?
This. This, this, this.
Like you, I don’t know enough about this case to feel any kind of outrage, really. I didn’t follow it, and was annoyed whenever some media outlet forced it on me. It saddens me that a child died, and I suppose we’ll never really know why.
As to your remarks about jury duty…I’ve never tried to duck it, and on the two occasions when called, I have reported and spent less than a day before being sent home, without even undergoing voir dire. As a practicing attorney, I would really appreciate the opportunity to serve on a jury, but I don’t expect that I will ever have that honor. The fact that counsel can dismiss potential jurors, with or without cause, tends to limit the quality of the jurors who wind up actually serving. It might be better if it were like the old military draft, but I don’t see that happening.
Jury Duty? I always go when summoned. And they always toss me off.
I’m a mature white male, and they don’t ever bother to wonder if I’m the total cynic in the bunch, or somewhat libertarian, or an advocate of Jury Nullification, or whatever.
I’ve been in the pool for two Federal Juries and six County ones in the past five years. And the Defense always strikes me. How little they know.
For the record, my dear Wife is totally annoyed with me, because she thought that Casey Anthony should have been executed. And I’m still saying “Show me some evidence”.
I may believe that she did kill the child, but if I’m on that Jury, and the .Gov can’t show me proof “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt”, I’m honor bound to acquit, the way I see it.
It isn’t the perfect world, but it’s as close to it as we can come, and we have to keep to our standards. They had no real evidence that she did it, and so they didn’t convict.
The Lord will judge, in his own time. Whatever we do is secondary to that, I suspect.
I’ve sat in several jury pools. I have an advanced technical degree and like to look at facts (OK trending geek). Defense lawyers invariably (the last three times) just toss me out after establishing that I have a degree. Gone. Not going to argue the facts in that case. Don’t jump on everyone for not doing their civic duty. You show up and see what happens.
I’ve never tried to duck jury service – and have only served on a jury once. That time was a trial trying to convict a man of attempted murder of a police officer. Did he assault her? Yes. Did he try to kill her…? Um, the proof just wasn’t there. What shocked me was the two people in the jury pool who were willing to convict just because the officers claimed the guy tried to shoot her – even though no one saw it, there was a gun with no proof that the alleged ‘gunman” had ever touched it (no attempt at fingerprinting or establishing contact between suspect and weapon – other than the fact it was magically at the scene and moved around by the officers).
Did we think he tried to shoot her? Yeah. Did the prosecution prove it’s case? Not by a long shot. Most of the evidence was “well, the police say it, so it’s so…”.
RE: Casey Anthony…well, I think she probably is a narcissist who did not want to be a mom, and thus possibly accidentally caused the death of her daughter. But I haven’t followed the case, haven’t sat in the jury, and don’t know the evidence.
A part of me really believes she killed her kid. But did the evidence presented by the prosecution support that? I don’t know. Our system works ’cause it’s slanted in the support of the accused. That means that sometimes the bad guys walk – but karma catches up with them. Just look at OJ.
The last time I was called to jury duty I went for a couple of days but was never picked to serve on a jury. I would gladly go again if called.
I have faith in the jury system but very little faith in prosecutors and the law enforcement officers. The lie every day that they go to court and it hurt them in this case.
The jury came up with exactly the verdict they had to as the case was poorly argued and poorly investigated.
amen and well said, techy guy.
Like you, I pretty much ignored this case. I never considered it national news worthy. It always came across to me as the stuff of tabloids. Tragic and deserving of justice, but not national news.
I do caution those who are convinced that something is amiss. There is a tremendous difference between what prosecutors and defense attorneys are permitted to present as evidence, and what journalists can report to their readers. Also remember that the latter must develop narratives that affect a bottom line, which may or may not have anything to do with justice.
In the end, if I have to trust Nancy Grace, or a judge and a jury of fellow citizens who must live in the same community as the accused, I will default to the latter nearly every time.
We should all pray that law enforcement continues to pursue justice, however long it takes and wherever it may be found.