Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This reminds me of the quote "Juries are full of people so stupid they couldnt find a way out of jury duty"
My mom got out of being on a jury for a molestation case by saying she disagrees with using the actual technical terms for genitalia infront of a little girl.

Dropbear Victim wrote:
Turn up dressed as Judge Dredd. That'll work.

I wore an 'I AM THE LAW' shirt my first round of jury duty as a kid. I was sent home before noon.

 Dez wrote:

Dropbear Victim wrote:
Turn up dressed as Judge Dredd. That'll work.

I wore an 'I AM THE LAW' shirt my first round of jury duty as a kid. I was sent home before noon.

Are you sure it wasn't just because you were a kid?

 Frazzled wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:
That would be quite a stretch, it is hardly contempt of court to say "I know about this hairy topic in the legal world".

https://www.rt.com/usa/324359-man-arrested-jury-nullification/

That's not really what I'm talking about, what that guy did was influencing people that could very well have already been put on a jury, which is (rightly so) a crime. I was merely saying that when you give a reason as to why you can't be put on the jury, you state the knowledge of jury nullifcation. Or if they ask a question like "Is there anything other than the facts that would change your determination of guilt?" You answer yes.

That being said the article mentions that jury nullification is a right, is that actually the case in the U.S. or is it just the article paraphrasing the man's beliefs?

 Krellnus wrote:
That being said the article mentions that jury nullification is a right, is that actually the case in the U.S. or is it just the article paraphrasing the man's beliefs?

It isn't explicitly a right, but the jury can return any verdict it wants for any reason it wants and all you can do about it is attempt to appeal. Jurry nullification is just a fancy term for "the jury returns a 'not guilty' verdict even though I really think they should have returned 'guilty' instead".

 Peregrine wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:
That being said the article mentions that jury nullification is a right, is that actually the case in the U.S. or is it just the article paraphrasing the man's beliefs?

It isn't explicitly a right, but the jury can return any verdict it wants for any reason it wants and all you can do about it is attempt to appeal. Jurry nullification is just a fancy term for "the jury returns a 'not guilty' verdict even though I really think they should have returned 'guilty' instead".

This I know, as nullification is ultimately the price we pay for judicial system that is as fair as possible, now I know most countries have laws preventing the punishment of jurors for the return of a 'wrong' verdict, perhaps I should have phrased my question as "In the United States is Jury Nullification specifically called out or does it just come under the usual 'can't punish jurors for wrong verdicts'?

Surely jury nullification is a fundamental part of any common law system?

I wore an 'I AM THE LAW' shirt my first round of jury duty as a kid. I was sent home before noon.

Kudos.

Re: Jury nullification, this vid might be useful:

I was elected foreman of a jury once.

Kind of felt bad for the guy, as it was his 3rd conviction for drug possession, and this time with intent to manufacture/distribute.

No legitimate reason to be in possession of 100+ pseudaphedrine tablets from 3 different stores....

 Steve steveson wrote:
Surely jury nullification is a fundamental part of any common law system?

Not really. Jury Nullification is an unavoidable consequence of having a finder of fact distinct from the judge. The jury doesn't have a right to nullify, there is just no way to stop it.

There's popular support for it, but jury nullification isn't allowed under any statute or case law. Now, part of that is a prosecutor can't appeal a finding of fact, only a findings of law, so there's just no relief possible. If 12 people in a jury say that the person didn't commit the crime, there simply isn't any recourse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dez wrote:

Dropbear Victim wrote:
Turn up dressed as Judge Dredd. That'll work.

I wore an 'I AM THE LAW' shirt my first round of jury duty as a kid. I was sent home before noon.

Be careful: a lot of courts have rules for how jurors should dress. You could find yourself doing a night for contempt of court.

So, Cheesecat, when do you go for jury duty and if you already are there, how's the attempt to escape coming along?

Eh iv gotten called for 3 so far.

I gotten dismissed for all 3.

its honestly a nice chance to get out of work and just hang out, read a book, or meet new people.

you should just go and do it.

I just tell them that I'm deaf... (wears powerful hearing aids in both ear)

My disability lets me get out of many things.

It's not till June. 6th.

Still trying to get out of it, or are you going to do the right thing and perform your civic duty?

 Ouze wrote:
Still trying to get out of it, or are you going to do the right thing and perform your civic duty?

I'm confirmed for going as I can't really get out (not over 65, don't have military or legal background, no criminal record, not in school, etc) but there's still a screening process where they go through a series of questions, so I might be able to get out of that by not sounding qualified to be a jury

member.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
I just tell them that I'm deaf... (wears powerful hearing aids in both ear)

My disability lets me get out of many things.

I think they have accommodations for people with hearing disabilities.

 Cheesecat wrote:
I think they have accommodations for people with hearing disabilities.

I can't speak to Canada but in my experience, I've been on jury duty at least 4 times and I really didn't see any accommodation for deaf jurors. I think it's likely in federal court, because they have electronic microphones anyway but the state trials I've been on it was the volume of the person speaking.

However it's totally possible that deaf jurors are accommodated be pre-planning - you fill out a survey here before you appear - so there simply were no deaf people there when I was there. Perhaps if you indicate you are deaf on the survey they work with you to get hearing assistance or a signer or what have you, as I presume the ADA requires accommodation.

Just say you're prejudice against all races.

How do you get called for jury duty anyways?

In the US they pull it from drivers license registration I believe, and they filter it out for X years last served - for example, in Iowa you can't get called more than once every 3 years or some such.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
Just say you're prejudice against all races.

Do they not have contempt of court in Canada?

 Ouze wrote:
In the US they pull it from drivers license registration I believe, and they filter it out for X years last served - for example, in Iowa you can't get called more than once every 3 years or some such.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
Just say you're prejudice against all races.

Do they not have contempt of court in Canada?

I have no idea, I have never been called for Jury Duty and I don't think my parents have either.
I heard you had to own a home to be called for that, which explains why we, and I weren't.

We get letters, which you must respond to. I think you get a summons if you don't respond to it which means you could conceivably be arrested at a traffic stop.

 Ouze wrote:
In the US they pull it from drivers license registration I believe, and they filter it out for X years last served - for example, in Iowa you can't get called more than once every 3 years or some such.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
Just say you're prejudice against all races.

Do they not have contempt of court in Canada?

Why is that contempt of court?

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
In the US they pull it from drivers license registration I believe, and they filter it out for X years last served - for example, in Iowa you can't get called more than once every 3 years or some such.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
Just say you're prejudice against all races.

Do they not have contempt of court in Canada?

Why is that contempt of court?

Presumably for lying to the court. Obviously, it’d be fine for you Frazz, as you actually do hate everyone. Except dogs, but they rarely end up in jury trials.

Nevelon understands!

"No your honor, he's not being snarky. He's the World's Most Crotchety Man. "

"I don't always yell at my neighbors, but when I do, its while drinking Budweiser. now get off my lawn."

Do your duty! For the Emperah!

 Nevelon wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
In the US they pull it from drivers license registration I believe, and they filter it out for X years last served - for example, in Iowa you can't get called more than once every 3 years or some such.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
Just say you're prejudice against all races.

Do they not have contempt of court in Canada?

Why is that contempt of court?

Presumably for lying to the court. Obviously, it’d be fine for you Frazz, as you actually do hate everyone. Except dogs, but they rarely end up in jury trials.

What if I was prejudice against all races?

 Rainbow Dash wrote:

What if I was prejudice against all races?

I don’t think that’s going to end well. One of two things is going to happen:

You fail to convince the court that you are telling the truth, and thus, contempt.

You do convince them that you legitimately hate everyone and are a racist. While they might not toss you in jail right there, welcome to all sorts of watch lists.

Like I'm not on those lists already..er uh did I say to much?

Pistols at Dawn wrote:
From the hacky, unfunny overplayed 'jokes' in US tv and films it seems like Jury Service is considered on par with root canal.

We were specifically told during the induction not to try and weasel out using the 'Oh, I'm massively biased against *insert group here* excuse.

The issue is that it's a huge time sink that is basically unpaid. Conscript labor, if you will.

You can try that excuse. And it becomes part of the public record. Which means you probably lose your job, because nobody in HR is going to let an open racist work at their company.