Forgot [MI]!!

Got called once in MA, where you go in for one day, and if you're not picked, that's all for you. Didn't get picked for either of the 2 cases- a statutory rape case (thank goodness!), and a civil case regarding a car accident (I think).

Never even been called. Haven't missed a single goddamn election since I was 18 years old, and never been called for jury duty. Not that I'm bitter.

(Then again, I'm funny-looking, overeducated and opposed to the death penalty, so there's a pretty good chance I wouldn't get to serve anyway.)

I was just thinking about this on my way to work this morning. When I hear about people that were excused from high-profile cases, I always wonder if I would have been excused.

Ah, no thanks to jury duty. Aside from the $8.00/day pay.
If you've heard the name Robert Picton, you may want to change your mind and holler "HANG HIM NOW" to get off jury duty. In Vancouver, it's going to be a long trial. Horror filled. You just won't come out the same.
Vancouver Province
Vancouver Sun

Sigh, I am called in for jury duty pretty much every 6months or so for the last two years. I keep telling them, "Dude, I am not a citizen". They keep telling me "Dude, stop by the Court House with your passport your this and your that". I do, always. They do too, always, let me go without ever looking at the papers. Maybe next time I bring the communist manifesto with me. Or the Unabomber transcripts. Or something.

I've never been called for jury duty, and I'm told that now that I'm a lawyer, I will never have to serve. I'm kind of sad about that. I think the right case would be really interesting.

OTOH, if you ever need to get *out* of jury duty (cribbed from somewhere): "Your fucking Honor, I have Tourette's Syndrome."

I've been called up twice. I showed up for one and wasn't picked that day and didn't have to go back (Van Nuys, CA). The other one was in Houston. We were still in the "lawyers questioning potential jurors phase" when the guy pleaded guilty to molesting his son. I am so very glad that was the outcome.

I was on a jury with an attorney who actually said (after the trial started) well, if he got pulled over I'm sure he did SOMETHING! (yeah, DWB) That case cost me whatever tiny hope I may have had for the justice system.

I've been called three times: once in Pasadena where the case was settled before a jury was picked, once in NYC where I inferred from the questioning that a young man had been selling crack near an elementary school in Queens and the undercover cop hadn't filed his paperwork correctly (I wasn't picked) and once after I bought my condo, but was let go when they realized that I was still within the four year gap and had just moved to a new address.

I got called for the Federal Pool in Tulsa when I was 19. You had to call in every night for like six weeks to see if you made it to the smaller pool. I made it once, and actually got called into the jurors pool. It was a case of a minority on trial for a bank robbery, and I got picked off by the DA for my volunteer tabling for ARA (anti-racist action).

I'd always heard you could get off a jury very easily by saying that you'd been part of a racist org. Apparently it's just as easy (and probably a bit easier to own up to) by working for an anti-racism org.

A year or so back my mom served on a jury for a meth-addiction/abusive relationship/justifiable-self-defense homicide case. Given she's a mid 50's church lady, a lot of what she learned there was a shock to her.

Once in Fulton County, GA, and once in Dekalb County, GA. In the Fulton County court, the clerk flat out asked everyone with a college degree to stand up. We were then excused.

In Dekalb County, we filled out a questionnaire that included a question about college education but nothing regarding race. About 45 minutes after the papers were collected, names were called and asked to line up against the wall. Virtually every white person was called as well as the three black men who were wearing suits, and we were then excused as well.

By virtue of what I do for a living, I am not allowed to serve on a jury.

I was the foreman (woman) on a jury in Dublin. It was one of the most interesting and depressing experiences of my life.
Two 18 year old girls go to a party, drink way too much so they sleep it off in one of the beds. 20 yr old man comes along, gets into bed, removes one girls underwear and attempts penetration. Which wakes girl No1 up from a very deep sleep.
Under our law if penetration actually occurred it's rape, not Sexual assault. But 2 older men on the jury said no way can a man penetrate a woman from behind in the "spoons" position. so he must have just tried it on, and she crys rape.
To this day I don't know if they were being truly ignorant or just thought they would have tried the same thing under the circumstances and felt sympathetic towards the alledged rapist. He got a suspended sentance for SA. And 8 years on I'm still angry

I have been called many times, questioned twice, and served once.

The first time I was questioned, it was an asbestos case. The plaintiff's lawyer looked like a small-shop, family-practice kind of guy. The defendant's lawyers were major suits. We all had to fill out a questionnaire about what we knew and thought about asbestos, whether we had ever worked with it, some questions about corporate responsibility and liability. Having been a theatrical electrician, I've seen more than my share of asbestos. I said something like if a corporation were aware of a problem and went ahead anyway, it should be held accountable, but I would judge any case on its individual merits.

When we returned to voir dire after the lawyers had read the questionnaires, the plaintiff's lawyer started with a few friendly questions about theatrical work. Then one of the defendant's lawyers stood up and said, "Excuse me, why are we even talking to this person?" Struck for cause!

The second time was an eviction case. The landlord said it was an owner move-in, the tenant said it was retaliation for having challenged a rent increase and requested repairs and security improvements. I felt bad for both parties. The tenant was an elderly woman on a fixed income who'd been living there forever. The landlords were immigrants, obviously unfamiliar with the finer points of Oakland's rent control ordinances. Their son (the putative move-in) needed a two-bedroom place for his family.

The judge allowed the jury to take notes, and to write down questions. We could pass them to the bailiff, the judge would review them and inform the lawyers about them so they could choose to get their witnesses to clarify things. The thing that struck me was that all the jurors obviously felt we were missing information to help us decide the case. The lawyers' questioning, on both sides, did not nail down crucial details about timing and other aspects. More than one of us handed in questions, which were either not asked, or not answered to our satisfaction.

The bailiff offered to take us all out to lunch if the deliberations went to a second day. One juror asked if it was going to be a first-class meal. He said, "Well, you can super-size it!" As it turned out, we didn't get there. When we got to deliberations, we all kind of looked at each other and made the best judgment we could, but I'm still not satisfied by it. We decided for the tenant, but I think if the landlords had gotten better advice before the trial, they could have avoided the whole issue - had a place for their son, not had to evict the elderly tenant, and not been sued.

My mother is called up for and serves on juries regularly - she's often their target demographic: Middle aged working mother of two with only a high school diploma. I think defense lawyers should probably fear my mother, as she's super sharp, opinionated, and knows how to handle groups of people. She also has no tolerance for liars or men with too much charisma.

Ha! You can super-size it. Funny.

I was called for a murder case. It was two weeks before Christmas, and it was plea-bargained during the selection phase. There must of been more than a hundred potential jurors present.

My husband was questioned. Possession of coccaine was the charge. Hubby disclosed that he has a friend with an alchohol and drug problem and has bailed him out of jail a few times. Probably one of the reasons he wasn't chosen.

Once. Unfortunately it was for BC and I'd been living in AB for 5 years so wasn't eligible (I maintain a car in BC so I'm on the list even though I'm not eligible).