I just got the notice that I am in the jury pool in my county for the January-March session. I moved here in 2010. This is my 3rd round of this here. I was a registered voter in another county for nearly 40 years and was only called twice (I sat on a jury once.) I normally don't mind doing this, but I don't want to be immersed in COVID containment crap. I can't figure out exactly how this works...being in a jury yet sitting the required distance apart (I refuse to say the SD phrase. It's annoying and hackneyed at this point.) Last time I was in the pool I accidentally found out how to get out...I told them I negotiated contracts for a living (FAR, UPA and UCC.) It seems they prefer blank slates to those with a quasi-legal/analytical background. I might pull this trigger again. I make a horrible juror. I don't have the right to judge others, nor do I have the capacity (or willingness) to assign guilt. For as business analytical as I am, I suck at the human stuff.
Never been called and now past age 70, never will be called. Anyone have interesting stories, including interactions with other jurors?
I've been on call for jury duty 8 times in my life...5 times in Fairfax County VA (outside of DC) and 3 times here in Louisa County (the middle part of the state.) I moved here in 2010. In fact, I'm "on call" for this session that ends sometime in March. I've been summoned to appear 6 times in total and interviewed as part of The Pool for specific trials 4 times. I've sat on one jury. The one trial I was in the jury for was a 3rd Strike Felony shoplifting case (I don't believe we were told beforehand that this was a 3rd Strike case.) The defendant was caught on camera stealing cosmetics from a grocery store, supposedly to sell for drug money. We sat for a full day of court and watched the video of him stealing the cosmetics. In the video, there was a mop & bucket sitting in the aisle, and the defendant side-stepped it on his way out. His attorney quipped "At least he didn't steal the mop." Seriously. We went back to start the second day of trial, and the judge dismissed us (and the case.) Apparently the state screwed up when charges were filed, and they assumed the name of the plaintiff to be Giant Food, Inc. The legal name of the business is Giant Food of Landover MD, Inc. There is no such entity as Giant Food, Inc. (this was really sloppy work on the Commonwealth Attorney's part.) Since it was a defective filing, the case was dismissed. I assume that charges were refiled. When we showed up for the second day of trial and were dismissed, a few of us cornered the guy's [public defender] attorney and asked him WTF was the comment regarding the guy not stealing the mop??? Schmuck.
I served on only one jury (1985). It was a murder trial. A man shot and killed his girlfriend, but that was not in question. It was what the charge should be---premeditated murder, felony murder, or manslaughter. They video taped the second round questioning of jurors with a room full of observers. Both lawyers, the judge, and the defendant sitting right at the table. The trial lasted 3 days. We went to deliberation in the afternoon. The jury seemed hopelessly hung (3-4-5), but the judge wouldn't let us go. We finally agreed on felony murder and they called everyone back into session near midnight. A few days later I met one of the jurors at Sears, and he said he knew the defendant well, and that he had a history of battering women . I think that should probably have disqualified him as a juror, but what do I know. Two appeals afterward, for other reasons, both failed. The jurors got to know each other pretty well in just 3 days, and I actually felt lost for a couple of days afterward, like something was missing. Glad I got to experience it once, but don't ever want to again.
@Nancy Hart What scared me most about your post was not your physical presence in relation to the defendant, but the likelihood of a biased juror.
I served once. Bunch of mid- twenty idiots got drunk and drugged up,keyed thirty brand new cars at a local dealership. Actually took three days of testimony to find guilt.
I was picked once. We spent all morning in voir dire, then at least an hour getting seated "correctly " and being lectured about our duties. Then the judge released us for lunch. When we returned, we were seated with much fuss again. There was a heated discussion going on at the bench, we were hastily ushered out to the jury room where we sat for two hours. Finally, the judge came in and said that the accused was actually wanted in another state for a capital crime and there wasn't going to be a trial today. We were dismissed and sent on our way. Eight hours and nothing to show for it.
Once. I was chosen in a case where a man was injured, was in the hospital, and it was about a drug sale that had gone wrong. It lasted 2 days, and the second day, we were all driven to the hospital to hear testimony from the injured man for about 1 hour, as we gathered around his bed to hear questions from the lawyer. When all was finished, we debated into the late hours of the second evening, and they brought us supper in case we continued into the late hours. Two out of our group were convinced that the accused, a young African-American man, was guilty and wouldn't change their views, no matter what. The rest of us had reasonable doubt, because there was a "mysterious person" who was also involved, but the police were never able to locate him, or find out who he was, and we had no information of what his role was. My feeling was that, since the accused would have to serve 25 years, we had better be entirely sure he was guilty, or if not, then vote for him not being guilty. It resulted in a hung jury, much to our distain - because of the 2 of us who would not relent. I read in the paper about 2 months later that there was a new trial, and the accused was declared innocent and released.
My My last stint as a juror was a trial of a 75 year old woman stealing a carton of ciggs from Walmart. We found her guilty.
Not to worry. I remember that juror, because he said almost nothing during deliberation. Just quietly voted premeditated murder until the end. It didn't scare me to be at the table with the defendant. It just emphasized the seriousness of the situation, i.e, this was not a TV show with actors. Maybe that was the purpose. And that's why I don't care to do it again.
So how do you feel about being told to go back until you all agree? I gotta think that the urge to get out of there and to go home can be so compelling that people will vote "whatever" just to be done with it.
I've thought about that a lot. It was definitely a strong motivator for some near the end. Trying hard to think on the positive side... How about this? It's good there are 12 people. They have already been winnowed down previously. Hopefully at least one or two of them are fair and unbiased and will not change without very good reason. If that's the case then the ones who just want to get it over with will go with those, just to go home. Their opinions weren't that strong to begin with. Btw, the 5 that voted manslaughter at the beginning were all college age students, and were horrified to find out afterwards that the penalty for the 2 higher counts was exactly the same (20 years). However the judge said the man would likely only serve 7 years with good behavior. But I digress...
There was a Mennonite woman that sat on the jury with me. She did not have to swear but she did 'attest '.