I’m 48 and I’ve never once been summoned for jury duty for anything. Ironically, I could easily do it - my union contract has a thing where my pay is covered, my side business can easily be done by my wife or even my kid while I’m busy. I’d happily do it.
That said there is no death penalty here in Canada so I wouldn’t have that on my conscience.
Yes, thank you, I came here to mention jury nullification. I would also mention that the judge and lawyers often have a strong reaction when one brings up jury nullification while being questions as a potential juror for a case. They don’t seem to appreciate this particular stream of civic engagement.
I was under the impression that it’s an almost guaranteed way to get out of jury duty.
I’m pretty sure there’s a baby in them bathwaters.
You can’t reform a corrupt system from within. The system will either tolerate you by corrupting you, or reject you.
Actually learned somthing from the comix pages…
Personally, if I believe that if the state wants to incarcerate someone, it should pay handsomely for the privilege.
Well, the other option is for systemic racism to be because of a few bad apples on the bench.
Clearly we need to rethink things, but I wouldn’t start by removing the checks to power that were introduced to redress a different flavor of judicial abuse.
It should actually go a step further and separate out cases that should really be in civil court. But keep the onus in place for violent offenders, who create the headache in the first place.
Reminder to self: read up on the details of Jury Nullification while waiting to be called for jury selection.
Although they get paid to be their, I get the feeling that Judges hate the grind of jury selection. It take forever, and they have to do it over and over and over. I don’t think a judge would take kindly to your doing so. Dunno if a judge has ever found someone in contempt for doing what you suggested, but they really don’t like letting people out of jury duty.
Why on earth when you have a union pipe-fitting background would you not just say that knowing that patch isn’t a union logo, and leave it at that?
For good or for ill the juror was doing due diligence. Being a union pipe fitter doesn’t mean the juror knew the appearance of every legit union patch in existence. All they could say would be “I don’t recognize that patch”, not “that isn’t union patch”.
ICE officers shouldn’t be allowed to wear unofficial patches as if they are the storm trooper version of a TGI Fridays server.
I should have clarified that the goal of discretely learning about jury nullification just before being called as a juror is to be a better prepared juror, not to get out of jury duty. I don’t have any trouble getting out of jury duty; the prosecution very quickly determines that I don’t come from the bootlicker demographic. I have never gotten on a jury. But if for some reason I slipped in, I would want to have the tools to address the rare cases where law and justice were misaligned.
IANAL but everything I have read agrees that judges do everything they can to keep jury nullification out of the discussion. Which is all the more reason to read up on the contours of where and how it can be invoked, to avoid getting fined worse than the pipe hitter union buster.
“Don’t server on juries” ? that’s your take away? seriously WTAF?
So yeah if you want to shirk your duty bring it up. If you want to actually invoke it keep your trap shut about it.
If it was based on police providing said evidence, I’d argue that nothing can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I have very reasonable doubts about anything those guys say.
As to this particular juror, I hope he can get the fine reduced. It’s exorbitant.
If the juror did research, after being told not to, he was wrong. He should have followed the proper procedure, which those who have served on juries (thanx, @knoxblox and @DukeTrout ) have outlined.
Although I have many issues with the justice system, it’s what we have, and so I will do my civic duty if called. I just got a notice yesterday to register for the federal court jury selection. Maybe I’ll get to serve this time. (Only been called once before, for county court; it was the day before Christmas & no juries were needed, thanks but no thanks.) I’ve been waiting all my life to serve on a jury. I was raised by a Perry Mason/Law & Order fan, and it’s imprinted on me that serving would be both tedious and fun, somehow, but absolutely my DUTY.
Me either, but Stephen Colbert had a cute segment on it yesterday.
The Pompeo part starts at 7:05, and Colbert discusses “Pipe Hitters” as a sexual innuendo.
Should we really keep propping up an obviously broken system with our compliance? At what point do we become complicit in the system that is incredibly oppressive to our fellow man and refuse to give that compliance? At what point with lack of change, do we abandon the notion that we must comply with injustice in order to correct it?
I’m sick and tired of hearing that phrase in isolation.
You know the whole aphorism right?
A few bad apples SPOIL THE WHOLE BARREL.
And when we let people like Arpaio and Roy Moore obtain and maintain authority it proves the system is rotten.
