Jury Duty

[Coop77]

Anyone ever served on a jury?
I just got picked for an 11-day trial. This sucks.

[N*E*R*D]

Nope sorry , just tell them your racist they'll let you off

[bodybuilder1107]

yeah i just got one last week but i own a business and told them i had noone to run it and it cant function without me and they let me off, no transportation excuse works also

[Bojangles69]

Everyone in my family gets off because I'm an ex-con.

All you have to say though is you have no faith in the justice system. They will NOT pick you.

[Tock]

I was on a 5 day trial for a child custody case. It was pretty interesting . . . A couple split, one was a reformed addict, the other an exotic dancer. Wasn't difficult to figure out where to assign the kid . . .

I know it's not convenient, but it's the price we pay to live in a functioning democracy. Imagine the justice system we'd have if we didn't have juries (or juries hand-picked by the gov't).

[Bojangles69]

Whered you send the kid? Between a reformed addict and exotic dancer I don't see any one being worse than the other..

[inky-e]

I told them once that I think ALL cops are crooked and my Daddy is the Grand Dragon at the local KKK. lol They never contacted me again.

[DSM4Life]

When the judge asks if there are any reason you can't serve to raise your hand i always raise my hand. I have been booted twice from duty. Still to this day the judge has never asked why i couldn't serve but still lets me go.

Maybe because it cost me $11.00 to park in the @#$ing city and you only give me a $9.50 check for the day you @$%$%ing #$%#%ers !

Rant off.

[RuhlFreak55]

I was on a 5 day trial for a child custody case. It was pretty interesting . . . A couple split, one was a reformed addict, the other an exotic dancer. Wasn't difficult to figure out where to assign the kid . . .

I know it's not convenient, but it's the price we pay to live in a functioning democracy. Imagine the justice system we'd have if we didn't have juries (or juries hand-picked by the gov't).

i think you're rather confused.....that is what we have now

[Skully44420]

i've never gotten a request for jury duty...i dunno why?...i would just tell them that i believe in anarchy

[RuhlFreak55]

i've never gotten a request for jury duty...i dunno why?...i would just tell them that i believe in anarchy

as long as you just keep ur bum over there in cali when the end comes.....the whole midwest is gonna be mine

[joe2009]

why is jury duty a bad thing, u get a few paid days off work and u dnt reli have to do much

[Coop77]

I know it's not convenient, but it's the price we pay to live in a functioning democracy. Imagine the justice system we'd have if we didn't have juries (or juries hand-picked by the gov't).

why is jury duty a bad thing, u get a few paid days off work and u dnt reli have to do much

I got put on an 11-day civil trial, but my employer only pays me for 5 days of jury duty. That means I have to use 6 vacation days, or go unpaid, so some lady can sue somebody and try to get a payday. My financial loss is her gain.

And to make it worse I'm an "alternate" juror, meaning I have to sit through everything and don't even get a vote in the end.

[Coop77]

yeah i just got one last week but i own a business and told them i had noone to run it and it cant function without me and they let me off, no transportation excuse works also

The judge made it very clear that if you claim financial hardship it must be EXTREME, as in, your kids won't eat if you have to serve. Everybody was saying everything they could think of to try and get out of it. It was kind of sad really.

[joe2009]

oh i didnt realise it was as bad as that, man no wonder why u hated it

[KatsMeow]

Since you have already been through the selection process it looks like you are just going to have to suck this one up, I used to clerk court, I guess it wasn't so bad because I got paid and the judge used to slip me jokes during the proceedings...
What is the civil case about? Or do you not know yet? I hated doing murder trials, they always took forever, and it was taxing on your emotions.

[Tesla]

It's strange to log on and see this thread here.....I have to go in tomorrow morning for my jury duty orientation...whatever that is.

[40plusnewbie]

FYI: I recommend everyone learn about jury nullification. Suppose someone is on trial for possession of a few vials of test? Do you think they should be convicted of a crime? If your on the jury of such a trial you have the power (and duty) to render them not guilty and at a minimum hang the jury if it runs against your conscience to have people convicted of drug possession for possessing steroids .

You might just save some poor bastard 10 years of his life by serving on a jury.

Jury Nullification, our most important constitutional right (and something judges will tell you is not allowed and render you not suitable to serve on a jury if they know you are aware of this right..... but judges are our servants. Masters do not take instructions from their servants. The Jury is the highest law in the land.)

http://www.fija.org/docs/jurors_hand..._jury_duty.pdf

[Tesla]

Wow....even creepier that I logged back into this thread and read about Jury Nullification. I was searching web sites on how to get out of jury duty and read about jury nullification.....good information to know.....juries should be informed of this up front.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/proj...ification.html

[Coop77]

Since you have already been through the selection process it looks like you are just going to have to suck this one up, I used to clerk court, I guess it wasn't so bad because I got paid and the judge used to slip me jokes during the proceedings...
What is the civil case about? Or do you not know yet? I hated doing murder trials, they always took forever, and it was taxing on your emotions.

I'm not supposed to talk about it until it's over, because you guys might influence me, or whatever, but it's nothing exciting.

[Coop77]

FYI: I recommend everyone learn about jury nullification. Suppose someone is on trial for possession of a few vials of test? Do you think they should be convicted of a crime? If your on the jury of such a trial you have the power (and duty) to render them not guilty and at a minimum hang the jury if it runs against your conscience to have people convicted of drug possession for possessing steroids .

You might just save some poor bastard 10 years of his life by serving on a jury.

Jury Nullification, our most important constitutional right (and something judges will tell you is not allowed and render you not suitable to serve on a jury if they know you are aware of this right..... but judges are our servants. Masters do not take instructions from their servants. The Jury is the highest law in the land.)

http://www.fija.org/docs/jurors_hand..._jury_duty.pdf

In a trial like that they would ask potential jurors their opinion on the law and weed you out so you don't do that.

[J-Dogg]

They mail me those papers to fill out for selection. I've never sent one back

It's only a matter of time before I'm in jail for one.

I'd just let the guy go anyway.

[J-Dogg]

In a trial like that they would ask potential jurors their opinion on the law and weed you out so you don't do that.

That plus if you were jacked and tan they would assume you were on the AAS anyway.

[Skully44420]

as long as you just keep ur bum over there in cali when the end comes.....the whole midwest is gonna be mine

deal...as long as you midwesterners stay away from my fvckin beaches!!

[40plusnewbie]

In a trial like that they would ask potential jurors their opinion on the law and weed you out so you don't do that.

They will not weed ME (or any other citizen who knows about Jury Nullification, believes in it, and sees the judge as a servant to the people and therefore to ME and the accused) because I will play dumb. It is morally correct to not let our servants (judges, prosecutors) manipulate us via corrupt methods (asking "will you convict someone who breaks a law if it is proven they did so even if you disagree with the law?"...because I will say "Yes your honor" even though in my heart I am saying "F&^# NO, you evil SOB trying to deny the accused from having jurors on his trial who are wise enough and moral enough to recognize that we as jurors have a right and duty to judge the law and the facts".

If the judge tries to subvert the rights of us citizens it is our duty to not stand for it. By saying you will convict if proven the defendent broke the law beyond a reasonable doubt when you really will not if you think the law is unjust or the particular circumstances of the case make it unjust to convict that particular defendent.... when you really will not do that because it is evil and wrong.... you are doing your duty to your fellow mankind. Screw the judge, that is an example of a servant in government acting in a corrupt and evil manner, abusing their power. It is our moral obligation IMO to lie to that evil mo fo and then do the right thing in the jury chambers.

I will never be disqualified from jury duty for believing in jury nullification because I will lie to the judge if he asks me that s*$t. Our rights are being taken away year by year, I will do what I can to save some poor bastard from getting a criminal record and suffering the consequences, and also save their families from suffering when it is morally the right thing to do. Possession of distribution of steroids is one example of a case I will NOT EVER convict someone of. If they are suppying 10 year olds that's a different story. But even if the defendent confessed on video tape and in writing I am getting on that jury and am voting not guilty and doing what I can to pursuade the other jurors to vote not guilty as well.

It is my duty to save my fellow man from suffering injustice from the hand of government. Judges are my servants. I might let them think that I'm a 'good sheep' following their 'mighty power' but in my heart and mind I understand they are OUR SERVANTS. If they are doing wrong it is MY DUTY to put a stop to that sh#t when I can so long as I can do so by non-violent means.

So my recommendation to everyone when faced with the prospect of being a juror on a criminal trial is to answer "yes your honor" when he/she asks "Are you willing to convict when the facts prove the defendent committed the crime beyond a resonable doubt even if you disagree with the law?" ..... but be smart enough, and moral enough to understand YOU are part of 'We the people' and YOU have the RIGHT and DUTY to protect your fellow man from an unjust government and from unjust laws. So tell your servant the judge you will so he does not use his power corruptly to dis-allow you from being on the jury.... and then do you DUTY to do what is right in the jury chambers. Also DO NOT use the words 'jury nullification' in the jury chambers.

But if your on the jury for some poor bastard charged with possesson of steroids (or some other crazy and unjust law for which you believe there should not be a law or punnishment) just argue in the jury room to convince everyone that the person should not be punnished, that the person was not harming society. That it is correct to find him innocent so he will not suffer because he should not suffer.

Jury Nullification, your most sacred right. Judges resent this and abuse their power to try to deny you from exercising it. But he is your servant. He is not your God and not some great mighty power on high to whom you should bow, he is YOUR SERVANT. Don't let him manipulate you into being denied to serve on a jury to save some poor bastard from being punnished when he should not be, or from being punnished more severly than he should be.

I"m looking out for you guys in this way.
Please do the same for me.

[wilson9d]

no..

[Coop77]

I will never be disqualified from jury duty for believing in jury nullification because I will lie to the judge if he asks me that s*$t.

You do have to take an oath saying you'll tell the truth.

[Diary of a Mad-man]

Maybe because it cost me $11.00 to park in the @#$ing city and you only give me a $9.50 check for the day you @$%$%ing #$%#%ers !

Rant off.

Good point. I had it a few months ago, I parked at a parking meter right past and around the corner of this road closed sign, where a parking garage accidentally collapsed, where no one was supposed to go.

I basicly risked my life to save that $11.00. I never said I was too bright.

Imagine though, you are stuck downtown and you know where a beautiful spot with 4 empty meters is?!?!?!?!? It wasnt on the main drag, so I wouldnt get a ticket .


....btw, I didnt get selected

[40plusnewbie]

You do have to take an oath saying you'll tell the truth.

If an evil dictator insisted that I 'take an oath' to obey evil I might take that oath to not get my head chopped off but I will still feel in my heart that I did nothing wrong lying 'under oath' to the dictator.

Judges are our servants. I know right from wrong and will not allow a servant of mine to back me into a corner to prevent me from doing what I deem to be morally good by preventing judicial injustice.

So lying under oath about being willing to convict someone even if I disagree with the law is not morally wrong IMO. Judges should not be asking this question and there is a lot of history upholding the absolute right of juries to judge both facts and the law. I"m not letting him take away my right to do so (which might just wind up saving you from having a criminal record for drug possesson btw) by pulling a fast one prior to appointment to a jury.

Jury Nullification is just in some cases. Don't let government tools like judges who are drunk on their own power con you into being a schmuck who lets the governement jail people for victimless crimes.

[40plusnewbie]

In 1789 Thomas Jefferson wrote:
"But we all know that permanent judges acquire an Esprit de corps; that being known, they are liable to be tempted by bribery; that they are misled by favor, by relationship, by a spirit of party, by a devotion to the executive or legislative power... It is in the power, therefore of the juries... to judge the law as well as the fact."

Jefferson regarded jury nullification as the most important check on government. In 1789 he also wrote:
"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution."

In 1794 First Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court John Jay said, "The jury has the right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy."

"It is left... to the juries, if they think the permanent judges are under any bias whatever in any cause, to take on themselves to judge the law as well as the fact. They never exercise this power but when they suspect partiality in the judges; and by the exercise of this power they have been the firmest bulwarks of English liberty." --Thomas Jefferson to Abbe Arnoux, 1789. ME 7:423, Papers 15:283

"If the question before [the magistrates] be a question of law only, they decide on it themselves: but if it be of fact, or of fact and law combined, it must be referred to a jury. In the latter case of a combination of law and fact, it is usual for the jurors to decide the fact and to refer the law arising on it to the decision of the judges. But this division of the subject lies with their discretion only. And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact. If they be mistaken, a decision against right which is casual only is less dangerous to the state and less afflicting to the loser than one which makes part of a regular and uniform system." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XIV, 1782. ME 2:179

"The juries [are] our judges of all fact, and of law when they choose it." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:35

"The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy."
John Jay, 1st Chief Justice
United States supreme Court, 1789

"The jury has the right to determine both the law and the facts."
Samuel Chase, U.S. supreme Court Justice,
1796, Signer of the unanimous Declaration

"the jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact."
Oliver Wendell Holmes,
U.S. supreme Court Justice, 1902

"The law itself is on trial quite as much as the cause which is to be decided."
Harlan F. Stone, 12th Chief Justice
U.S. supreme Court, 1941

"The pages of history shine on instance of the jury's exercise of its prerogative to disregard instructions of the judge..."
U.S.vs Dougherty, 473 F 2nd 113, 1139, (1972)

The Right of the JURY to be Told
of Its Power

Almost every JURY in the land is falsely instructed by the judge when it is told it must accept as the law that which is given to them by the court, and that the JURY can decide only the facts in the case. This is to destroy the purpose of a Common Law JURY, and to permit the imposition of tyranny upon the people.

"There is nothing more terrifying than ignorance in action."


Goethe - engraved on a plaque at the Naval War College
"To embarass justice by a multiplicity of laws, or to hazard it by confidence in judges, are the opposite rocks on which all civil institutions have been wrecked."


Johnson - engraved in the Minnesota State Capitol


Outside the supreme Court Chambers
"...The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life."
II Corinthians 3 vs 6

"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself."
Thomas Jefferson

The JURY'S options are by no means limited to the choices presented to it in the courtroom. "The jury gets its understanding as to the arrangements in the legal system from more than one voice. There is the formal communication from the 'judge'. There is the informal communication from the total culture - literature, current comment, conversation; and, of course, history and tradition."
Dougherty, cited above, at 1135.

LAWS, FACTS AND EVIDENCE!

Without the power to decide what facts, law and evidence are applicable. JURIES cannot be a protection to the accused. If people acting in the name of government are permitted by JURORS to dictate any law whatever, they can also unfairly dictate what evidence is admissible or inadmissible and thereby prevent the WHOLE TRUTH from being considered. Thus if government can manipulate and control both the law and evidence, the issue of fact becomes virtually irrelevant. In reality, true JUSTICE would be denied leaving us with a trial by government and not a trial by JURY!

HOW DOES TYRANNY BEGIN?
WHY ARE THERE SO MANY LAWS?

Heroes are men of glory who are so honored because of some heroic deed. People often out of gratitude yield allegiance to them. Honor and allegiance are nice words for power! Power and allegiance can only be held rightfully by trust as a result of continued character.

When people acting in the name of government violate ethics, they break trust with "WE THE PEOPLE." The natural result is for "WE THE PEOPLE" to pull back power (honor and allegiance).

The loss of power creates fear for those losing the power. Fearing the loss of power, people acting in the name of government often seek to regain or at least hold their power. Hence, to legitimatize their quest for control, laws and force are often instituted.

Unchecked power is the foundation of tyranny. It is the JUROR'S duty to use the JURY ROOM as a vehicle to stem the tide of oppression and tyranny: To prevent bloodshed by peacefully removing power from those who have abused it. The JURY is the primary vehicle for the peaceable restoration of LIBERTY, POWER AND HONOR TO "WE THE PEOPLE!"

YOUR VOTE COUNTS!

Your vote of NOT GUILTY must be respected by all other members of the JURY -it is the RIGHT and the DUTY of a JUROR to Never, Never, NEVER yield his or her sacred vote - for you are not there as a fool, merely to agree with the majority, but as an officer of the court and a qualified judge in your own right. Regardless of the pressures or abuse that may be heaped on you by any other members of the JURY with whom you may in good conscience disagree, you can await the reading of the verdict secure in the knowledge you have voted your own conscience and convictions - and not those of someone else.YOU ARE NOT A RUBBER STAMP!

By what logic do we send our youth to battle tyranny on foreign soil, while we refuse to do so in our courts? Did you know that many of the planks of the "Communist Manifesto"are now represented by law in the U.S.? How is it possible for Americans to denounce communism and practice it simultaneously?

The JURY judges the Spirit, Motive and Intent of both the law and the Accused, whereas the prosecutor only represents the letter of the law.

Therein lies the opportunity for the accomplishment of "LIBERTY and JUSTICE for ALL." If you, and numerous other JURORS throughout the State and Nation begin and continue to bring in verdicts of NOT GUILTY in such cases where a man-made statute is defective or oppressive, these statutes will become as ineffective as if they had never been written.

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."


Samuel Adams



If someone wants to disagree with my position i would be happy to engage in mature debate on the issue. I just don't want to see people jailed for victimless crimes and serving on a jury in criminal trials is a way to put a stop to that nonsense. The government is not going to put a check on their own powers. WE THE PEOPLE are the government WE must do it. The Jury Room is the place to do it. Put someone in jail for having a case or 10 of steroids in their garage? Not on my watch!