It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jury Duty Fail. A sad eye opener

page: 1
27
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+7 more 
posted on May, 3 2016 @ 08:42 AM
link   
A few weeks ago I had posted about a experience I had when I had gone to vote in the last election. The long and short of it was that all I had wanted to do was write in my one nomination. Being a Rhode Island ballot, there wasn't any opportunity to do that. I was a bit Disgruntled as it was my first time in my 57 years I had decided to vote, even if it was a write in. I was also told I had to fill out the whole ballot. I have since learned from members responses, that this was not necessarily true and that I was misled. (On Purpose?)

While I considered myself pretty well educated and I did know some of the entries on the ballot, I confessed I had no idea of the others, which meant, I randomly picked just to get it over with. My concern in the pervious thread was how many others that were not as fortunate as I to have had a good education, picked at random themselves.

With this in mind, I wish to tell you of my day yesterday which involved being called up for Jury Duty. I'm guessing it is safe to say many of you have gone through this long drawn out event to do your civic duty, or to at least avoid being in trouble with the law.

Actually, I did have a part of me that was a little excited about it. After all I am American and the founding fathers made sure this system was established to guard our rights.

What a fiasco and how disappointing.
As you know the attorneys question you and try to explain what your duty is as a juror.

The prosecutor couldn't have been anymore confusing in his description of the laws if he had spoken it in a alien language. His questions left many of the potential jurors with the look of a deer in headlights. I don't honestly think I could even get into print here his definition of "Beyond a reasonable Doubt." It was That bad.

I wont go into the whole nine yards of the ordeal, but suffice to say, again, we were left with people just saying yes to get it all over with.

One thing I will mention though is whom they decided to choose in the end. All six chosen ones had admitted to knowing a number of the witness's, and also had made it clear they had a problem with certain things that had been explained to them or asked of them. For example, "Would you hold it against the defendant if he chose to use his right not to testify?" All yes.

"Would knowing the witness sway you in any way for or against the defendant?" All yes.(This is a very small town where everyone seems to know everybody). It appeared to me the witness that were known were either members of law enforcement or friends of the defendant.

This went on with many more eyebrow raising questions for me when I had realized the 6 they had picked when I thought back. about it.
Honestly, four of the six they had picked didn't come with the prize in their Crackerjacks if you follow me.

Did I mention these jurors were being picked to decide the fate of the defendant being charged with Assault and Manslaughter 1?

It just bothered me like it did the day I went to vote. This is going on all over the country on a daily basis. I was mad in a sense, but also really sad. I think when the founding fathers created these laws, they thought this was be the greatest country with the highest minds. In other words the people would be educated.

I seriously think we have clearly fallen short of That goal.




posted on May, 3 2016 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: onehuman

Yes, you nailed it.

I witnessed a murder trial...didn't miss a word of it....walked away troubled and remain troubled to this day about it.

Years later, we registered to vote and immediately got called for Jury Duty. I wrote that I preferred not to be chosen because I guaranteed there would be a hung jury if they selected me. I stated that, having witnessed a trial, and what took place when the jury was not in the room, it left me convinced that a fair trial was not possible.

And doing that, left me more troubled, as I have never registered to vote since, if this is the only result and our votes don't count anyways.

An idea comes to me, but in a small town you might want to reconsider, but if you have the time, you might want to attend the actual trial. It sounds like the trial has already begun without the accused and it would be interesting to see how things unfold, if you can put your best poker face on. But, on second thought, you might want to just walk away.

Thanks for sharing your experience, troubling as it was.

CF



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: onehuman

Sadly, this doesn't surprise me.

I've been reading up on the origins and history of grand juries recently, which once had both accusatory and investigative powers, as well as jury nullification in trials (known as the "petit jury" which hears evidence and determines guilt, as opposed to the "grand jury" which hears evidence but only determines if there is enough evidence to bring charges), but our juries have been virtually stripped of any real power over the years.

Which means that the people have been stripped of any real power in the courts as well -- in many, many ways, not just via our juries.

There was a time in our history when the people could form a grand jury to investigate -- and bring charges if deemed warranted -- against anyone, especially government officials. Now, we have to hope that the "proper" government officials will actually investigate and bring charges when/where appropriate, but knowing it's really all about politics -- not justice. Even in hand-picking the jury to get the desired results from the cherry-picked evidence they offer...



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   
Ive been summoned many times over the years and have served 5-6 times.We had a few dummies in the mix, but also some very sharp cookies. I enjoyed the duty and going out to lunches daily with new friends. I enjoyed some of the testimonies from expert witnesses. I also enjoyed detting paid by my company and not having to go to work.

I clearly remember the little guy in the wheelchair with a helmet on his head to protect his brain. He had been chased into his home by some jerk. The jerk stood over him and shot him multiple times as he tried to escape the attack. We found the attacker guilty, and the little guy was in his wheelchair by the court room door, tears of grattitude streaming down his face, grasping our hands and thanking us as we left. He had been afraid the guy was going to come backand finish the job.



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea


There was a time in our history when the people could form a grand jury to investigate -- and bring charges if deemed warranted -- against anyone, especially government officials. Now, we have to hope that the "proper" government officials will actually investigate and bring charges when/where appropriate, but knowing it's really all about politics -- not justice. Even in hand-picking the jury to get the desired results from the cherry-picked evidence they offer…

The obvious example that comes to mind is the Michael Brown case. The grand jury chosen by the Prosecution, i.e., the law, choosing and presenting evidence to the Grand Jury on behalf of… the Law.

Throw away the trial process, trial chambers and defense, let the criminals themselves choose who is guilty or innocent.



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr


The obvious example that comes to mind is the Michael Brown case. The grand jury chosen by the Prosecution, i.e., the law, choosing and presenting evidence to the Grand Jury on behalf of… the Law.


Yes. It was the Michael Brown case that got me taking a good hard look. Especially after I read a long article about the many irregularities and violations of rules in the grand jury hearing and process. I wish I had bookmarked the link, but I didn't realize then the rabbit hole it would lead me down.



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Our legal system is horribly broken and corrupt. Nearly more so than the political system.

Justice may be blind, but she sure can smell money...



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I mean, how is this even remotely "just" ? Recent news from up here:




After several postponements, an Anchorage Superior Court judge decided Monday that Alexandra Ellis -- who pleaded guilty last year to striking and killing an Anchorage cyclist in 2014 -- would go to prison on May 2, allowing her to complete her semester of college.

Ellis, 18, was sentenced in August to a year in prison in the death of cyclist Jeff Dusenbury, whom she hit while driving intoxicated on July 19, 2014, according to a state sentencing memorandum in the case. She'd pleaded guilty in May to criminally negligent homicide and driving under the influence.

ADN.com

Seriously? You get wasted and run over a cyclist, killing him and speed away. You get ONE YEAR for that? And you get to finish your semester of college?! WHAT!?

They nearly let her apply her time in a "rehab center" to the 1 year sentence, knocking the sentence down to 11 months.

You see, her Daddy is an attorney. He used to be a state prosecutor and worked for the very people who are prosecuted her. Now he's a defense attorney in a private practice, and has hired his buddies and no doubt still has many "connections" to the judges and district attorney's office.

How is this fair or equitable? The entire community here is outraged, and the judge just seems cool with it.



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom


You see, her Daddy is an attorney. He used to be a state prosecutor and worked for the very people who are prosecuted her.

Another unabashed good ol boy network. Hard to blame them, the example is set by the US government, prosecuting unjust wars on a grand scale, with impunity. What are they gonna do , come to smallvile and correct their 'oversight'?

This isn't the 60s were presidents call down to local officials and threaten them with the national guard unless they start observing peoples 'civil rights'.

Unfortunately.



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: onehuman

face it,the people you find that are able to go to a jury are homeless or unemployed.Most people BEG to avoid it! I've been called up 3 times,told them I had a handicapped relative that needed my care,always worked.I used to work for an ex wall street lawyer,he gave me great advice...wear a camo t shirt,an NRA hat,and read the bible in the waiting room! NO lawyer would choose you for jury duty.



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: intrptr


The obvious example that comes to mind is the Michael Brown case. The grand jury chosen by the Prosecution, i.e., the law, choosing and presenting evidence to the Grand Jury on behalf of… the Law.


Yes. It was the Michael Brown case that got me taking a good hard look. Especially after I read a long article about the many irregularities and violations of rules in the grand jury hearing and process. I wish I had bookmarked the link, but I didn't realize then the rabbit hole it would lead me down.


Having watched the Casey Anthony trial pretty much gavel to gavel I also saw the contrived nature of the states case there. They were trying to pin that on her, it was too obvious. Glad the jury came through on that one…



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 05:35 PM
link   
It's an imperfect system but the main problem is smart, conscientious people that would treat it seriously and be fair avoid it like the plague and will work their arse off to get a deferment, what tends to be left over to pick from is the last guys anybody would want deciding their fate if they stood trial.



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

I'd forgotten about Casey Anthony... that whole thing was so creepy. There were lots of creepy people involved and I never understood why they wanted so bad to pin it on Casey and practically ignored all other possibilities. I don't remember all the details now, but that never ever sat right with me.

Little did I know...



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Our legal system is horribly broken and corrupt. Nearly more so than the political system.

Justice may be blind, but she sure can smell money...


I don't think justice is blind anymore. We have essentially devolved into a class system in the US and different classes get different rights in court.



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: blkcwbyhat
a reply to: onehuman

face it,the people you find that are able to go to a jury are homeless or unemployed.Most people BEG to avoid it! I've been called up 3 times,told them I had a handicapped relative that needed my care,always worked.I used to work for an ex wall street lawyer,he gave me great advice...wear a camo t shirt,an NRA hat,and read the bible in the waiting room! NO lawyer would choose you for jury duty.


I've never understood this mindset. If you consider yourself to be an intelligent and fair individual, is it not in societies interest that you sit on the jury rather than some random schlepp who proved themselves to be too stupid to get disqualified during the selection process?



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan




We have essentially devolved into a class system in the US and different classes get different rights in court.


Its the same anywhere in the western world, i like how we use use words like democracy and freedom and spout how our way of life is so much better, then criticize countries that have harsh laws, yet he we are locking up people for possessing plants and being poor only to let the real criminals who cause immeasurable pain and heartache for so many free..



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: onehuman

I guarantee if you are trained to examine facts dispassionately you will be eliminated during voir dire.

They don't want engineers, physicists, etc. A lawyer will burn a strike on an engineer in a heartbeat.

eta: you can instantly get off jury duty by saying you are a former service degreed engineer with a security clearance. It's like shining a sunlamp on a vampire. The lawyers hiss and their skin starts burning. They throw their capes over their faces and start squalling "It burns...IT BURNS" and they hustle you out. Five for five so far.
edit on 3-5-2016 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2016 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Our legal system is horribly broken and corrupt. Nearly more so than the political system.

Justice may be blind, but she sure can smell money...


Or her minions, which she'll defend come hell or high water.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: intrptr

I'd forgotten about Casey Anthony... that whole thing was so creepy. There were lots of creepy people involved and I never understood why they wanted so bad to pin it on Casey and practically ignored all other possibilities. I don't remember all the details now, but that never ever sat right with me.

Little did I know…

So glad someone else saw it that same way. You're right about creepy characters. Probably the guilty parties. Father, ex cop. Accused by Casey of sexual molestation form an early age. Her little sister, 'found' dead by her dad. Casey struggling with telling the truth and hiding from the repercussions. After all the law is on her fathers side, covering for him lest he tell the whole truth about how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Just my o.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

So glad someone else saw it that same way.


Me too! I couldn't believe how many were "sure" Casey was guilty, even as they admitted that her guilt was never proven, and that there were other likely possibilities. I was very glad they weren't on the jury, and I applaud the jury for being able to see past the B.S.


You're right about creepy characters. Probably the guilty parties. Father, ex cop. Accused by Casey of sexual molestation form an early age. Her little sister, 'found' dead by her dad. Casey struggling with telling the truth and hiding from the repercussions. After all the law is on her fathers side, covering for him lest he tell the whole truth about how deep the rabbit hole goes.


I was still far too naive at the time to understand the full implications of her father being an ex-LEO and the significance of that thin blue line. But my suspicions also went to the father and the brother. Her brother was pretty darn creepy too. My gut feeling at the time is that they went after the weakest link to protect one or the other. Maybe both? As badly as she was smeared in the press and in court, she lost all credibility and even if she had spilled the beans, no one would believe her anyway. She always struck me as walking a very thin line between a rock and a hard place. She knew something...



new topics

top topics



 
27
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join