Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Female Info Boards => Open Talk for Girl Discussion => Topic started by: Princess L on February 14, 2009, 01:05:14 PM
-
Experiences?
-
I served on 2 different trials many years ago. One was where a guy was suing a friend (I think it was more insurance companies) for a broken arm (medical expenses and pain & suffering) sustained when he fell out of a tree he was helping cut down. Idiot was up on a limb with a chain saw and cut the limb he was on ::)
The other one was a commercial tenant in a building constructed with a faulty roof. Boring zzzzzzzzzz
In both cases the attorneys were very shabby and unkempt. I've been called a few times since, but the cases always seem to settle out of court beforehand, so I haven't had to show up.
-
Yeah, we waited for a few hours. They gave us coffee and donuts. When I got called up I recognized the defendant as a member of the gym I worked out at, we acknowledged each other and one of the lawyers asked if I knew him. I said I recognized him from the gym and was released. I think I got a check for like 7 bucks or something.
-
No. It's supposed to be a jury of your peers so they had barred doctors for a while.
-
No. It's supposed to be a jury of your peers so they had barred doctors for a while.
There are so many wrongs in that, I don't know where to begin ::). I hope they've come to their senses.
-
There are so many wrongs in that, I don't know where to begin ::). I hope they've come to their senses.
Where's the wrong?
I thought it was a pretty simple statement.
-
Where's the wrong?
I thought it was a pretty simple statement.
Since when did education, social status, occupation, religion, gender, race, marital status, income, etc. determine one's qualification to be called to jury duty?
-
Since when did education, social status, occupation, religion, gender, race, marital status, income, etc. determine one's qualification to be called to jury duty?
A jury of one's peers suggests some of the factors you mentioned would be equal. Peer means equal standing. Only about 2% of Americans have an advanced degree so it wouldn't necessarily be fair to the person being judged.
Education changes your perspective and adds some bias. I'm not sure the old way was better but still see the logic in asserting some people can be overqualified for jury duty.
-
A jury of one's peers suggests some of the factors you mentioned would be equal. Peer means equal standing. Only about 2% of Americans have an advanced degree so it wouldn't necessarily be fair to the person being judged.
Education changes your perspective and adds some bias. I'm not sure the old way was better but still see the logic in asserting some people can be overqualified for jury duty.
The King or Queen of England can not be committed of crimes, they have no peers.
-
The King or Queen of England can not be committed of crimes, they have no peers.
I believe they aren't above the law.
Didn't some guy in England abdicate his rights for conspiring with the Nazis during WWII?
-
I believe they aren't above the law.
Didn't some guy in England abdicate his rights for conspiring with the Nazis during WWII?
I don't know, I just heard that in middle school.
-
A jury of one's peers suggests some of the factors you mentioned would be equal. Peer means equal standing. Only about 2% of Americans have an advanced degree so it wouldn't necessarily be fair to the person being judged.
Education changes your perspective and adds some bias. I'm not sure the old way was better but still see the logic in asserting some people can be overqualified for jury duty.
All of the above can and does add bias, not just education or lack of. The juror pool comes from all walks of life and to claim a person educated in a particular field makes them "over-qualified" to perform their civic responsibility is prejudicial and absurd. Of course specific bias' come up when attorneys are selecting jurors for a specific trial, but the initial pool is a cross section the voting American public.
This wasn't the intent of this thread :-\ I was just curious what others experiences were.
-
All of the above can and does add bias, not just education or lack of. The juror pool comes from all walks of life and to claim a person educated in a particular field makes them "over-qualified" to perform their civic responsibility is prejudicial and absurd. Of course specific bias' come up when attorneys are selecting jurors for a specific trial, but the initial pool is a cross section the voting American public.
This wasn't the intent of this thread :-\ I was just curious what others experiences were.
It's pretty simple, IMO.
Someone overqualified may not be able to properly fulfill the civic responsibility. You're sort of ignoring what 'peer' means. The law pretty much says "a jury of your peers" not "People from all walks of life". It doesn't mean certain people are better than others, simply that everyone isn't a peer. Bill Gates isn't a peer of mine, LOL!
They stopped doctors and lawyers from being impaneled because it was believed an unfair advantage existed over other members when it comes to interpreting evidence and legal process. Excusing certain people was probably considered class discrimination so changes were made. No idea if the change has made any difference.
Most of the people I know who did jury duty found it semi-interesting but had made their minds up well in advance of closing arguments. I'll have to do it eventually and hope it's something cool like murder or pimpin'. :)
-
I've never had to serve.
-
Wow, it's weird that you made this thread Princess L. I have been called to serve Judy Duty next Monday here in FL.
It used to be that if you were a police officer or related to a police officer you were excused. My father was a cop as well as my ex-husband. But that changed at some point because I ended up getting called before I moved out of Massachusetts and didn't end up serving because it was settled while we were waiting.
Hopefully I'll be excused this time too! :)
-
Laura, hope if you're chosen it's interesting and nothing horrible :)
-
Wow, it's weird that you made this thread Princess L. I have been called to serve Judy Duty next Monday here in FL.
oooo 8) this could be exciting :D
I ended up getting called before I moved out of Massachusetts and didn't end up serving because it was settled while we were waiting.
Around here, every county seems to have a little different process. Last time I was "called", I was given 5 dates for 5 trials that could last 5 days. The rule is that you are obligated to serve 5 days. So if the first trial lasted 5 days (or more). you're exempt from the rest. However, if the first trial only lasted 2 days, you're obligated to continue with "showing up" for the next one. Makes it incredibly difficult to plan ANYTHING and you don't find out until calling the courthouse's recorded message the night before you're scheduled if there's been a change or they've settled ::)
-
Yeah, I hope that IF I am called...it isn't boring...I will soooooo fall asleep, lol. :D
But I also hope it's not one of those trials that locks the jury from going home and such. :( That would suck. :p
-
Yeah, I hope that IF I am called...it isn't boring...I will soooooo fall asleep, lol. :D
But I also hope it's not one of those trials that locks the jury from going home and such. :( That would suck. :p
Have you been picked yet?
-
Have you been picked yet?
Only to show up on the 23rd. Not for panel. Won't know that until Monday.
-
I hope you get something cool!!
-
I hope you get something cool!!
Me too! But what I'll probably get is 2 people arguing/suing over a property line, lol.
-
Me too! But what I'll probably get is 2 people arguing/suing over a property line, lol.
Maybe a dog custody battle.
A friend's old lady took his dog when she split... he's still pissed.
My telling him it sounded like a country and western song didn't help much. :)
-
Nah we dont have juries here.
-
Maybe a dog custody battle.
A friend's old lady took his dog when she split... he's still pissed.
My telling him it sounded like a country and western song didn't help much. :)
-
He got pissed and said I was mean.
She had "gone to visit family for a week" and asked for a ride home from the airport, 90 miles away. He, being the faithful husband, went to pick her up and of course couldn't find his wife, freaked out, asked around, couldn't call because she had the cell phone, etc.... Finally panicked and came home to find the house had been cleaned out. Broad took everything that wasn't nailed down including the bed and his three-legged rescued dog.
It sounded like a country and western song, LOL!
In my defense.... it was funny to me. :)
Any hard feelings are his fault. He's known me for years and knows damn well I'm an ass. There's no way he could have expected me to be nice or not find that funny. It's been over a year and he's still a little pissy over it, LOL! It came up two weeks ago... lame ass was explaining that the dog was more affectionate than his wife.... told him he was lame and should be glad she was gone because that's pathetic.
-
Well yesterday was the day. I spent all day in the courtroom on a hard cold bench. The morning started off with 300 potential jurors and we were called in groups of 50-60. If you were not picked from the 50-60 then you had to go back down to the Jury pool and wait to be called again. I was called for a crimal trial. The judge spent a couple hours explaining what the trial was about and our responsiblities as jurors. The a paper was passed around and we had to answer these 10 questions:
1. What town do you live in
2. How long
3. Working/not working
4. Where working
5. Married/single/divorced
6. What does spouse do
7. Any grown children
8. What do they do
9. Do you know anyone here
10. Are you registered to vote in FL
After having to answer all those in front of the accused and then answering multiple questions from the judge the jury was then brought down to 30. Then we broke for and hour and a half for lunch.
When we returned we went under a battery of questions by the prosecuter and defense attorneys. I felt like I was the one on trial. After a few hours of that they decided upon the 7 jurors. I was not one of them.
The case was Burgery, battery, kidnapping and carjacking with a dangerous weapon. The accused was young (maybe 19-22 year old) black male. He was very clean cut and well dressed at this jury selection. He did make me feel a little uncomfortable because when certain jury members were talking he would stand up and look at them. There were 2 people there to support him. Another young black male and young black female. Although the accused was well dressed and clean cut, his supports were not. The male had on baggy jeans, a long tee-shirt, several gold chains and a baseball cap. He also walked with that sway (like one leg is numb or goes out). The female had on skin tight capri jeans, a tee-shirt and a hoodie. I just thought to myself that if this is how his friends/family shows up to support him, he obviously dresses and acts the same...so why bother putting on a suit? If it were me, I would have told my supporters to make sure they were well dressed when appearing.
The crime was obviously serious due to the charges, but they (the attorneys) wanted to know who was familiar with forensics, DNA testing, they wanted to know who was familiar with the Omni product and GPS. They also wanted to know if we believe that all cops tell the truth and that they don't lie under oath. Pffft ummm no. ::)
-
You should have pulled an Uncle Ruckus from The Boondocks, LOL!
-
anytime they ask, say the guy should fry.