In the mid 70"s was called for jury duty on a double murder and during questioned for suitability of being selected was asked my feelings about death penality sentence .... My answer was in the "yes" if found guilty... The defense quickly released me "cause" ......................... drill sgt.

I was being deposed once on a crash investigation. Attorney asked how I could find his driver at fault for following too closely when I never measured an exact following distance. I replied I did have a distance. He asked what the distance was.

My response was "well the distance was zero feet when the vehicle impacted the one in front of it".

After that deposition, that was the last I heard of the case.

I work the criminal side of the street, but if they're gonna call a cop into civil litigation, I'm gonna have some fun collecting my OT.

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
Almost 2 years into my retirement career of State Circuit Court Bailiff with around 30 Jury Trials completed (half criminal and half civil). Jurors almost always get it right. In a murder case after reaching a guilty verdict, the jury Foreman asked me did they get it right. I then got to tell the jury the rest of the story, as this was the defendants third murder by the time he reached 18 years of age, and this didn’t count all the armed robberies he did.

Interesting. I'm in a similar position, and the rule here is that you do not discuss cases with the jurors, even after the verdict is in and the case is adjourned.

I served on a jury in '79 in Lucas County, OH. The defendant, 17 at the time of the crime, and his older brother had robbed and sexually assault three women ranging in age from 72 to 91. In the process they beat an 84 year woman to death with a piece of cinder block.

There were no fingerprints, and it was prior to DNA typing, so the evidence was circumstantial. It included the defendant's blood soaked jacket and the victim's television, which was sold to a neighbor the morning after the murder. The defendant and all the victims lived within a two block radius. The defense had nothing, and I remember feeling bad for the victim's son when he took the stand. Despite the fact that he had produced a receipt for the TV with a corresponding serial number the defense questioned him if he was "sure" that it was his mother's. That pretty much pissed me off.

The trial took about a week total and we found him guilty in about three hours. I remember deputies escorting us to our vehicles afterward, maybe because some of the defendant's friends/family were not pleased with the verdict.

The best interaction of the week was when the defense was cross examining the plaintiff’s live-in boyfriend. It was a very hostile exchange from the first question. All of us felt that the boyfriend lied and omitted to support her claims.

At one point the defense asked him a follow up question and without hesitation the boyfriend snapped back "that’s irrelevant".
The lawyer said "your honor".

The judge leaned forward and said to the boyfriend "I don’t have a lot to do in this courtroom, but deciding what is relevant and what is not relevant is one of them, so you just answer the question’s until I tell the defense it’s not relevant".

We kept it together but once we got back into the jury room we all lost it. "That’s irrelevant" became a private joke for the week in the jury room.

Back in 1992 when I moved from NY to SC and changed over my drivers license I received a notice for jury duty at the Magistrate Court.

They must have mailed the damn notice the same day I was issued a SC license.

The DUI case was interesting in that the arresting officer also served as the prosecution. The defendant had a lawyer present also.

While the officer was presenting his evidence the defense attorney objected and asked for dismissal of the charge. The Magistrate Judge ruled in favor and the case was dismissed.

After the court cleared out the Magistrate explained to us jurors the officer made an error when presenting evidence. The exact nature of the error was not provided.

Haven’t been called by federal, state or local since.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
Almost 2 years into my retirement career of State Circuit Court Bailiff with around 30 Jury Trials completed (half criminal and half civil). Jurors almost always get it right. In a murder case after reaching a guilty verdict, the jury Foreman asked me did they get it right. I then got to tell the jury the rest of the story, as this was the defendants third murder by the time he reached 18 years of age, and this didn’t count all the armed robberies he did.

Interesting. I'm in a similar position, and the rule here is that you do not discuss cases with the jurors, even after the verdict is in and the case is adjourned.

In Missouri, only Grand Jury Deliberations are secret. After the verdict, jurors are released from their oath prohibiting them from talking about the case and can talk to anyone. Most of the time they do talk with attorneys or the Judge, and they always have questions for me.

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by RogueJSK:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by jsbcody:

In Missouri, only Grand Jury Deliberations are secret. After the verdict, jurors are released from their oath prohibiting them from talking about the case and can talk to anyone. Most of the time they do talk with attorneys or the Judge, and they always have questions for me.

When the judge was dismissing us told us that while we were free to discuss the case, we did not have to and both the plaintiff, the defendant, and their counsels were prohibited by law from contacting us. There are no records of our deliberations other then the verdict and all jurors note taken during the trial were destroyed.

While I am confident in our verdict, and all of us were on the same page from the beginning of deliberations, I don’t think I am comfortable talking to any of the parties involved about it.

I was in a jury pool being chosen, and the Judge asked if anyone felt they could not be objective before beginning, and I said that I did not believe in the validity of chiropractic medicine. One of the layers gave a nod to the judge and I was outta there.

Many years after that I became a big supporter of chiropractic medicine, because I was in a real pickle physically, and a chiropractor saved my ass, allowing to walk normally again.

After that I became a big believer in Physical Therapy medicine as well for exactly the same reason.

And after that I came to a similar conclusion for accupuncture, again for the same reason.

Lots of things in life are like that.

If I got called in again for jury duty regarding a medical case, I might not be able to get out of it, since I'm not keen on lying to a court or a judge. I can't think of anything much more foolish than that.

I'm retired . I wouldn't mind being called for Jury Duty . Per Diem plus mileage is a bonus . Enough to buy a good lunch .
I got a questionnaire in the mail a couple of years ago . I filled it out but never heard anything . My son is a Deputy in a neighboring Parish so that will probably get me kicked out anyway .

quote:

Originally posted by wrightd:
After that I became a big believer in Physical Therapy medicine as well for exactly the same reason.

Oh, definitely. PT rocks. And not just when recovering from surgery or an injury.

I started having nerve issues with my neck/shoulder/arm about 10 years ago, out of the blue.

Went to my PCP who couldn't figure it out, so he sent me to a shoulder specialist doc.

Shoulder specialist couldn't figure it out so he sent me to an elbow/wrist specialist doc.

Elbow/wrist specialist couldn't figure it out so he sent me to a nerve specialist doc.

Nerve specialist doc couldn't figure it out so he sent me to a neck specialist doc.

Neck specialist doc couldn't figure it out so he suggested a course of PT prior to a MRI and surgery as the next step.

Walked in to my first PT appointment, described my symptoms, and the physical therapist said "Oh, I know what that is..." and that very day I had some relief and within a few weeks a complete fix. It was a compression of the brachial plexus nerve cluster near my shoulder/collarbone, which was sending nerve signal issues all the way out to my elbow and my neck. Stretching my pectoralis minor was the ticket.

5 doctors over several weeks (and hundreds of dollars in copays) couldn't figure it out, but a physical therapist knew immediately how to resolve it.

quote:

Originally posted by SpinZone:
I finished up 5 days at the court house today after serving on a jury for an automobile accident trial

The case involves the defendant, an 18 y/o man who was the driver of the #1 car in a 3-car pile-up. He was driving a GMC Serria and rear ended a stopped Dodge Caravan propelling it into a stopped Hyundai Element. The Plaintiff is a 30 y/o woman who was the passenger in the front seat of the Element. She is claiming that he is responsible for causing permanent injuries to her and seeking damages for past and future medical costs and pain and suffering. To muddy the waters, the accident happened on 31 Oct. on 21 Feb, she is in another accident where her car is T-boned and totaled. Part of our instructions include separating blame for damages between the 2 accidents.
Prior to the start, the question of fault for the accident has already been agreed to. we are only looking at injury damages.

It was very interesting to go through the process. Seeing the inner workings was really eye opening. To say it is not like TV is an understatement.

The judge seemed to be pretty good. as the week went on I thought he was getting tired of both sets of counsels but he never lost his professionalism when we were in the courtroom.

it was interesting watch the testimony and evaluate the witness testimony. one person flat out lied to us, another probably lied and definitely omitted facts and had to have true detailed pulled out. Newsflash, if the lawyer asks you a question during cross examination, he probably already knows the answer.

We wrapped it up today and spent about an hour in deliberations. while I didn't really want to do it, I am glad that I went through the experience.

Dan Newlin....""call me now""

quote:

Originally posted by SpinZone:

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by RogueJSK:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by jsbcody:

In Missouri, only Grand Jury Deliberations are secret. After the verdict, jurors are released from their oath prohibiting them from talking about the case and can talk to anyone. Most of the time they do talk with attorneys or the Judge, and they always have questions for me.

When the judge was dismissing us told us that while we were free to discuss the case, we did not have to and both the plaintiff, the defendant, and their counsels were prohibited by law from contacting us. There are no records of our deliberations other then the verdict and all jurors note taken during the trial were destroyed.

While I am confident in our verdict, and all of us were on the same page from the beginning of deliberations, I don’t think I am comfortable talking to any of the parties involved about it.

Basically, in Missouri it is the juror’s choice, after released from oath, if they want to talk about the case with anyone. That includes how they reached their verdict.

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:

quote:

Originally posted by SpinZone:

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by RogueJSK:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by jsbcody:

In Missouri, only Grand Jury Deliberations are secret. After the verdict, jurors are released from their oath prohibiting them from talking about the case and can talk to anyone. Most of the time they do talk with attorneys or the Judge, and they always have questions for me.

When the judge was dismissing us told us that while we were free to discuss the case, we did not have to and both the plaintiff, the defendant, and their counsels were prohibited by law from contacting us. There are no records of our deliberations other then the verdict and all jurors note taken during the trial were destroyed.

While I am confident in our verdict, and all of us were on the same page from the beginning of deliberations, I don’t think I am comfortable talking to any of the parties involved about it.

Basically, in Missouri it is the juror’s choice, after released from oath, if they want to talk about the case with anyone. That includes how they reached their verdict.

In Texas, when I was the foreman on a petit trial, after the trial was over the prosecutor came to me and asked what they the prosecution did well and didn’t so they could learn. I had a jury with a full blown hippie but we ended up voting guilty but it was very frustrating as I had to keep reminding the hippie guy to stick to the facts. All he would say is he hated cops. I don’t know how he made it onto the jury and I had to do a lot of talking to keep him on track and what our task was regardless of how he felt about LE.

Obviously when I served on a Grand Jury, I am prohibited to this day and beyond to discuss the details of any case or discussion ever held during a Grand Jury session.

My wife got jury duty for a rear-ender MVA trial in the City of St. Louis. Unanimous verdict for the Defendant, so you know it had to be a bad case if that was the result in that venue. I got the post card shortly after and was already in the process of moving to Iowa so I missed that dance.

Fast forward to last month, I got the postcard to be on call for possible petit jury service for the month of March. I called in Friday and was not in the group to report tomorrow morning. We'll see what next week brings.

As a lawyer who has done both plaintiff and defense civil trial work and criminal defense, the odds are pretty unlikely I will be picked, but there is no mechanism to secure a pass on showing up. Ironically, I just spoke with someone last month that had a warrant for his arrest for missing jury duty. He didn't show up, then missed the summons for not showing up, was arrested for failure to appear, bonded out and then missed his next court date so forfeited his bond and got a new warrant.

Our state bar's journal had an article last year or so about a trial lawyer's experience of being selected and serving on a jury. It must have been a pretty bad panel if they allowed a lawyer to be on it.

Last year I was summoned on the last day of my eligibility. They called in at least 50 potential jurors and selected 25 to 30 of us, 13 jurors and the rest were back-ups during jury selection. Sat there a day and a half just for jury selection. Ended up I was the only one out of the 13 original to end up on the jury. Then sat thru trial, not a problem just doing my duty. What did piss me off was that while doing my taxes this year I found out that I had to pay taxes on the $50/day they paid me.

I never posted about this after the trial, but I guess now is a good time. I was on a Federal jury last year for 3 weeks total. We wound up convicting 2 people on I think a total of 34 counts, all mail and wire fraud.

The 2 people were found guilty on May 31 and sentenced September 30.

Guilty Verdict

Sentencing

<Important parts from the first article>

The Justice Department announced today that a jury found a former senior executive and a former sales manager of Epsilon Data Management LLC (Epsilon) guilty of federal criminal charges related to the targeting of millions of U.S. consumers for mass-mailing fraud schemes.

Robert Reger, 57, of Boulder, Colorado, and David Lytle, 64, of Leawood, Kansas, were found guilty today of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and numerous counts of substantive mail and wire fraud.

According to evidence presented at the two-week trial, the defendants were key participants in a scheme that knowingly sold targeted lists of consumers and their addresses to perpetrators of fraud schemes involving the sending of false and deceptive mail to consumers over the course of 10years. The defendants committed the crimes while working at data broker Epsilon which used transactional data collected from marketing clients to predict new “responsive buyers” using computer algorithms and a database of 100 million U.S. households. The jury found the defendants knew that their scheme was providing data to fraudster clients. Evidence at trial showed that the defendants used Epsilon’s algorithms to predict new lists of consumers most likely to respond to the frauds and that the defendants’ business unit worked with dozens of clients with scam letters promising large prizes or falsely personalized astrological mailings promising wealth.

As part of the scheme, the conspirators sold the names and address of millions of U.S. consumers to perpetrators of schemes engaged in fraud, knowing that their fraudster clients were targeting elderly and vulnerable people. Evidence at trial showed that the defendants sold nearly 100 lists to just one fraudster client, and that the defendants had many other fraudster clients with scam letters. At trial, elderly victims and their adult children testified about the scam letters victims received falsely promising cash prizes. Evidence showed that each of these victims were targeted for fraud by members of the conspiracy. A number of current and former Epsilon employees also testified, along with three witnesses who previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud: a list broker and two Epsilon clients who operated mail fraud schemes.

I retired after more than 30 years in law enforcement and worked as an investigative and expert resource for indigent defendants in serious criminal cases for over 15 years. I'd love to serve on a jury, simply because I've wanted to experience the justice system from their point of view. Will I have that opportunity? Hard to say, but now that I'm pretty much totally retired, I've got the time and certainly (IMHO) the balanced point of view I think good attorneys are hoping for.

I got summoned three times during the 44+ years that I lived in Oregon. I wound up on one jury but we were released when the defendant opted for a bench trial. I never heard how that came out for her.

Two years ago I retired and moved back here to Idaho. Twenty-something years ago I dated a lady for a while, it didn't work out be we stayed in touch. She has three daughters and the youngest one and I always clicked. Over the years she's become "the daughter I never had". Her biological father was never a part of her life and I've become the closest thing she has to a father figure. She's graduating from college (3rd time, she's a dentist now) at the end of May and she would really like me to be there (in Texas). So I'm looking forward to that, already have a dog sitter lined up, just need to book flights and get a new pair of dress shoes. Then last week I get a jury summons in the mail, for the entire month of May. Even given my "meh" experience with jury duty in the past, I still think it's a good thing to do. But the timing of this one absolutely sucks. I'm trying to get them to let me defer it, but so far they're not listening. If I wind up having to miss this trip, I think my feelings about jury duty will take a serious hit.

quote:

Originally posted by pulicords:
I retired after more than 30 years in law enforcement and worked as an investigative and expert resource for indigent defendants in serious criminal cases for over 15 years. I'd love to serve on a jury, simply because I've wanted to experience the justice system from their point of view. Will I have that opportunity? Hard to say, but now that I'm pretty much totally retired, I've got the time and certainly (IMHO) the balanced point of view I think good attorneys are hoping for.

I've been retire 17 years now after 28 years working for the local Sheriff's Department.

I've received a summons for jury duty 5 times. Only had to appear twice but didn't get on either jury...one time i was the last person in the original pool and the seated the person just before me.

I know several defense attorneys from my time spent working the Courts. When I saw them in the hallways, during my service, they said they'd be happy to see me on one of their cases because they knew I could see through the usual BS thrown up by opposing attorneys