User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 12:06:36 PM EDT
[#1]
I hope she goes free.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 12:08:30 PM EDT
[#2]
I got stuck on a jury down here in Austin a few years back. Almost 2 weeks. It was a sexual harassment lawsuit. It was pretty interesting, getting to be in the courtroom, and seeing how it all works. It was even better to park just about anywhere, get a ticket, and take it to the judge to be dismissed.
me and 11 other citizens cost a large department store several hundred thousand dollars. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 12:12:33 PM EDT
[#3]
You had it better than I did. I sat reading for two week's. Was called on one cast and throw off the jury, because the defense attorney did not want ex-cop's on the jury. It was back to the jury pool for me. I read the Ultimate Sniper cover to cover once each week. Clearly the seat's around me were vacant. [smoke]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 12:30:34 PM EDT
[#4]
ETH might be able to answer this or explain it better than I can.
"questioning" the prospective jurors about their beliefs is considered by some to be illegal/unconstitutional. The argument goes something like this: You are supposed to be tried by a jury of your peers. However, by selectively choosing/deciding who is your 'peer' and who is not prior to the trial by jury, the results are skewed so that you are not being tried by your peers, but by a panel of 'carefully selected peers.' Basically, the prosecution will try to find hardliners who hate drugs (in this case) and the defense seeks to find those who are not concerned with the nature of the crime. However, since you are already dealing with a skewed audience (people who could get off work, older persons, housewives, lower education levels, etc.) then the results are already biased prior to the pretrial interviews. TheRedGoat PS. If I find the article that I read in regards to the subject I will post it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 12:35:24 PM EDT
[#5]
[url]http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Politics/Jury%20Duty/Jurors%20Guide[/url]
An interesting read. From the Article : "More than logic has suffered. As originally conceived, juries were to be made a safety valve way to soften the bureaucratic rigidity of the judicial system by introducing the common sense of the community. If they are to function effectively as the `conscience of the community,' jurors must be told that they have the power and the right to say no to a prosecution in order to achieve a greater good. To cut jurors off from this information is to undermine one of our most important institutions." TheRedGoat |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 12:35:50 PM EDT
[#6]
Not guilty!
Nevermind how pathetic she looked. A natural occuring weed just should not be illegal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 12:42:19 PM EDT
[#7]
What a pathetic waste of tax payers money.
I wonder what the dollar amout was for this trial for such a low quantity of weed? WOW two ounces of the stuff. She sounded like a big Nate Newtoon she male. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 12:56:25 PM EDT
[#8]
I know alot of you on this site are against weed. Of course you type that right after you sip your beer, but O well.
If I was caught with weed, I would just admit to having it, this lady sound be prosecuted for not owning the weed, but for trying to lie. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 1:00:37 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: this lady sound be prosecuted for not owning the weed, but for trying to lie. Your stoned right now aren't you ? LOL!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 1:06:00 PM EDT
[#10]
Jarhead-
I can't believe they were gonna let you on a jury. You are COMPLETELY unqualified. You are - intelligent literate gun owner military productive member of society COMPLETELY unqualified. [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 1:11:44 PM EDT
[#11]
So many people don't want to be inconvenienced with being on a jury, yet they are often times the first ones to complain about criminals getting light sentences.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 1:15:34 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: So many people don't want to be inconvenienced with being on a jury, yet they are often times the first ones to complain about criminals getting light sentences. Shoot, I'm dyin' to get on a jury, but I'm so fricken conservative, I think the trial lawyers assoc. had legislation passed to take me off all 50 states jury duty pools. garand(Hang'EmHigh)man |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 1:32:36 PM EDT
[#13]
My only opportunity for jury service involved a civil case - some guy rented a Bobcat, dropped a tree on it, plus a few other things. They were suing for damages.
I was #2. #1 was an architech who sniffed out where the trial was going, and when asked if he'd ever been involved in a law suit, replied - "My partners and I successfully sued the pants off three dentist for breach of contract." I doubt he was even late for work that day. In the course of deliberations, this one guy kept trying to make it a class issue, a race issue, anything except some guy rented a piece of equipment, destroyed it, and wouldn't make it right. I wish I coulda had #1 handcuffed to this fellow. Remember this when you try to get out of Jury duty folks. Shut your mouth, leave your Rush Limbaugh books at home, and do your best to get an honest seat. For once in your life, somebody is asking you for what YOU think is the right thing to do, and it carries the full weight and authority of the govt. Don't squander it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 1:51:42 PM EDT
[#14]
Hmmm, wonder [b]why[/b] she wouldn't have been offered deferred adjudication for this Class 3 misdemeanor, and if she was offered this, why she didn't take it?
I'm dead set against criminal prosecutions of folks for possessing less marijuana than I can comfortably fit in the glove compartment of my Jeep, but that's another issue altogether. There is probably more to this case than meets the eye. When I represented pot possessors back 'in the old days' the usual sentence was 'six months in jail, suspended for one year, deferred adjudication, and a $250.00 fine.' With 'deferred adjudication' the conviction does not become final until you fail to keep clean for the probation period. If you do, the Court dismisses the charges and the crime doesn't even go on your record! The arrest will be there, but the offense will be shown as 'dismissed with no finding of guilt.' Eric The(EasyDoesIt!)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 1:54:16 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Remember this when you try to get out of Jury duty folks. Shut your mouth, leave your Rush Limbaugh books at home, and do your best to get an honest seat. For once in your life, somebody is asking you for what YOU think is the right thing to do, and it carries the full weight and authority of the govt. Don't squander it. Geez, you make me want to go down and [b]volunteer[/b] for JD. LOL Excellent post! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 2:03:18 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Quoted: this lady sound be prosecuted for not owning the weed, but for trying to lie. Your stoned right now aren't you ? LOL!!! No I don't get stoned at work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 5:05:35 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: "questioning" the prospective jurors about their beliefs is considered by some to be illegal/unconstitutional. A jury of your peers? Forget about it. It's not gonna happen. The lawyers were careful to elicit information, and then phrase the questions in such a way as to make sure that, whatever your beliefs, "would you still be able to make a fair judegment based on the evidence?" Quoted: Not guilty! Nevermind how pathetic she looked. A natural occuring weed just should not be illegal. I should have been clearer. I made no judgement on her appearing "pathetic" based on what she was charged with. She was just very small, mousey and pale looking, and looked like she hadn't been dealt a square hand or a square meal in twenty years. Quoted: I can't believe they were gonna let you on a jury... Well, I made it into the courtroom, but like I said, they never made it to my end of the jury pool. I spoke up twice on "reasonable doubt" and some other point they asked questions about, and someone said on our way out of the courtroom that lawyers don't like anyone with strong opinions, so who knows? Thanks for the vote of confidence, anyway. Quoted: So many people don't want to be inconvenienced with being on a jury, yet they are often times the first ones to complain about criminals getting light sentences. I hope you don't think this post was in any way a complaint. I was eager to sit on the jury and am actually disappointed that I didn't get a chance to do so. I only hope that I get some of "our kind" on any jury that ever sits in judgement of me, God forbid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 6:50:44 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: "questioning" the prospective jurors about their beliefs is considered by some to be illegal/unconstitutional. Voir dire is french for jury tampering. [url]www.fija.org[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 6:54:17 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: I hope she goes free. I take it your a dope smoker? Sgtar15 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 9:32:18 PM EDT
[#20]
A summons arrived for me in the mail today. At first I was excited as I've been looking forward to jury duty. Then I opened it and found that it was for superior court, not the big county court in Martinez. Can jurors ask for a change in venue? [;)]
I've been called several times to county court and served once; felony battery against a police officer. While it was hard to stay awake at times, it was a rewarding experience and I look forward to serving again. (Edited cause my spelling is horable). |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 10:06:41 PM EDT
[#21]
Hey DVD, I just got a summmons as well. I don't know what to expect in WA, but I guess I'll find out.
BTW, I served on juries down The Bay from you in Alameda county a few times. During one juror examination a candidate said that his boss didn't want him to serve. When the judge asked who his boss was, the guy sheepishly admitted that his boss was Angela Aliotta. (You know, one of the SF handgun ban engineers besides Feinstein) The judge went ballistic. "SAN FRANCISCO CITY SUPERVISOR ANGELA ALIOTTA DOESN'T WANT YOU TO SERVE? WELL YOU TELL SUPERVISOR ANGELA ALIOTTA THAT YOU WILL DO YOU CIVIC DUTY! IS THAT CLEAR?" |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 11:35:32 PM EDT
[#22]
I served on a jury for a trial of a crack cocaine drug dealer in L.A., dealing drugs at MacArthur Park. We convicted him and put him away for life without possibility of parole. The defendant was no more than 35 years old.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2002 11:57:11 PM EDT
[#23]
I have served as juror 2 times in superior court.
You are welcome. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 2:05:34 AM EDT
[#24]
I have never served on a jury. I avoid it any way I can. With the laws and rules of evidence as they are, I feel as though I would not be able to make a fair judgment. I would probably always vote not guilty because of what was hidden from me.
It always completely miffs me how people can answer opinion polls about someone's guilt or innocence without all the details? I know I am wrong, but I just can't get around it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 2:20:34 AM EDT
[#25]
Jury Nullification.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 3:08:52 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: With the laws and rules of evidence as they are, I feel as though I would not be able to make a fair judgment. I would probably always vote not guilty because of what was hidden from me. The rules of evidence generally protect the defendants in these trials, not the government. I'd be more likely to vote to convict because of 'what was hidden from me.' It always completely miffs me how people can answer opinion polls about someone's guilt or innocence without all the details? It's a [b]poll[/b], not a trial, so don't get too miffed until the government starts locking folks up based upon polls! Surely you have an opinion on people's guilt or innocence before you hear all the evidence? I knew OJ was guilty long before I heard about the DNA evidence! BTW, wasn't he guilty?[:D] Eric The(SureHeWas,HeJustHadBetterLawyersThanTheStateOfCalifornia)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 4:49:01 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Not guilty! Nevermind how pathetic she looked. A natural occuring weed just should not be illegal. That's called jury nullification. It's how the system is SUPPOSED to work. Juries should judge the facts, AND THE LAW. It is "The Peoples" protection against tyranny.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 4:56:10 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: Quoted: With the laws and rules of evidence as they are, I feel as though I would not be able to make a fair judgment. I would probably always vote not guilty because of what was hidden from me. The rules of evidence generally protect the defendants in these trials, not the government. I'd be more likely to vote to convict because of 'what was hidden from me.' It always completely miffs me how people can answer opinion polls about someone's guilt or innocence without all the details? It's a [b]poll[/b], not a trial, so don't get too miffed until the government starts locking folks up based upon polls! Eric The(SureHeWas,HeJustHadBetterLawyersThanTheStateOfCalifornia)Hun[>]:)] Ummmm..Eric, I think we already are locking people up based on polls....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 5:00:32 AM EDT
[#29]
This is how it begins.............
[img]http://www.citybeat.com/2002-04-25/filmcouchpot-1.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 5:13:13 AM EDT
[#30]
[img]http://www.eatonlink.com/main/uploaded/FreakOnALeash/maryjanesnack.jpg[/img]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 8:35:19 PM EDT
[#31]
Da Big Judge said of all the animals that walk this earth,and all that creep or crawl,and of every herb that growest upon this earth you shall have dominion and use of. Something like that.
To each his own. Bob {8D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 8:39:53 PM EDT
[#32]
I don't know about ou guys, but I am looking forward to going to jury duty when I am called. Granted, I am only 20 and haven't really had the chance yet but it kinda sounds like fun to actually serve on a case. Am I an idiot for being excited?
Keving67 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2002 9:25:59 PM EDT
[#33]
I thought I was going to be called in Collin county last year, but it never happened.... I don't know if I would rather do this or go to work......
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
