[read of interest] Beyond a Reasonable Doubt - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Jetée · 12-03-2010, 04:00 PM

As is: Tux Life: "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" [read of interest] ... (similar to an 'anthology of interest', but shorter, more topical, & presently)

pressing, (I know none of you ever press me for more, but still...)
I shall provide thee with an excerpt: (posted two weeks ago)

I’ve spent the better part of the week serving as the foreman for a jury in a criminal case. As they tell you, you’re not allowed to talk about it with anyone, not even your fellow jurors, during the trial. As they also tell you, once the trial is over you can talk about anything you want. So, here goes.

I am one of those civics nerds who does not look for every excuse not to serve on a jury. I was a political science/journalism double-major and, though I’m far away from those in my professional life at this point, I still have a passion for the processes that bring us together as communities, societies and civilizations. I won’t say I wanted to be put on a jury for a criminal case, but when the opportunity arose I certainly welcomed it.

Jetée · 01-24-2011, 10:46 AM

Seeing as I have nothing better to do, I'll ask: how many of you read the above? Could you sympathize with the sentiments presented? What say you of the inferential argument that the justice system is "tilted", and doesn't rely on any hard, fast rules?

Furthermore, what, if any, were your own personal experiences with the oft-random notice of the civic duty that is sitting on a trial jury?

jewels · 01-24-2011, 05:03 PM

I didn't catch the original post and wasn't going to respond as you hadn't posted your own opinion. (Or were you the writer?)

All I can offer is my own experience. I've served on two juries so far and have seen interviews with jurors, probably a similar experience that many have had.

I can identify with the writer, as I was the last holdout on a case once. Sadly, the guy who had held steadfast with me until nearly the end wanted to go home for the weekend and changed his verdict. Then I found myself severely pressured by the entire room of jurors. I did eventually wimp out of what I thought was right , but the penalty went to an insurance agent and not the supposed victim. (If it matters, it was a PI case, a trip and fall, just before the caps came in on punitive damages. The "victim" wanted much more than I thought was reasonable, plus there had been warning signs posted.)

The only thing tilted, IMO, is humanity and interpretation. What one man views as reasonable may not be the same for another. And the woman he refers to may or may not have had a legitimate reason for her verdict. In most cases, we won't know what drove jurors to make the decisions they do.

Yes, sometimes it's screwy, but I sure don't know of a better way. But I like to think that if I was the holdout juror on a case where a human being's life was relying on the jury's decision, I would stand my ground.

deportes · 01-26-2011, 06:26 AM

Great story.

I was one of two jurors that held out on convicting a person of rape, it seemed to me that most other jurors were willing to convict a person on very weak evidence just so they could move on with their life's.

This person was accused of raping his ex partner with whom he had a child and it all happened after he had asked the mother of the child to move to another state where he found work, therefore he was also asking in a round about way for shared custody. She invites over for drinks and dinner at her house and he supposedly allegedly raped her. Next morning she calls a friend then the caps and makes an accusation and goes to the hospital to get a rape test.

When the case was presented to us, the accused rapist had already spend a year in jail waiting for this case to be brought to trial. Lost his job out of state and was facing hard time.

After listening to the evidence, I thought that the case should be resolved in family counseling not sending a person to jail.

Great lesson for me! It appears that lots of jurors do not get paid while serving their civic duty and move fast to convict on weak evidence in order to get back to work.

12-03-2010, 04:00 PM	#1 (permalink)
Jetée The Reforms Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition	[read of interest] Beyond a Reasonable Doubt As is: Tux Life: "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" [read of interest] ... (similar to an 'anthology of interest', but shorter, more topical, & presently) pressing, (I know none of you ever press me for more, but still...) I shall provide thee with an excerpt: (posted two weeks ago) I’ve spent the better part of the week serving as the foreman for a jury in a criminal case. As they tell you, you’re not allowed to talk about it with anyone, not even your fellow jurors, during the trial. As they also tell you, once the trial is over you can talk about anything you want. So, here goes. I am one of those civics nerds who does not look for every excuse not to serve on a jury. I was a political science/journalism double-major and, though I’m far away from those in my professional life at this point, I still have a passion for the processes that bring us together as communities, societies and civilizations. I won’t say I wanted to be put on a jury for a criminal case, but when the opportunity arose I certainly welcomed it. continue reading... __________________ As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi

01-24-2011, 10:46 AM	#2 (permalink)
Jetée The Reforms Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition	Seeing as I have nothing better to do, I'll ask: how many of you read the above? Could you sympathize with the sentiments presented? What say you of the inferential argument that the justice system is "tilted", and doesn't rely on any hard, fast rules? Furthermore, what, if any, were your own personal experiences with the oft-random notice of the civic duty that is sitting on a trial jury? __________________ As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi

01-24-2011, 05:03 PM	#3 (permalink)
jewels Eponymous Location: Central Central Florida	I didn't catch the original post and wasn't going to respond as you hadn't posted your own opinion. (Or were you the writer?) All I can offer is my own experience. I've served on two juries so far and have seen interviews with jurors, probably a similar experience that many have had. I can identify with the writer, as I was the last holdout on a case once. Sadly, the guy who had held steadfast with me until nearly the end wanted to go home for the weekend and changed his verdict. Then I found myself severely pressured by the entire room of jurors. I did eventually wimp out of what I thought was right , but the penalty went to an insurance agent and not the supposed victim. (If it matters, it was a PI case, a trip and fall, just before the caps came in on punitive damages. The "victim" wanted much more than I thought was reasonable, plus there had been warning signs posted.) The only thing tilted, IMO, is humanity and interpretation. What one man views as reasonable may not be the same for another. And the woman he refers to may or may not have had a legitimate reason for her verdict. In most cases, we won't know what drove jurors to make the decisions they do. Yes, sometimes it's screwy, but I sure don't know of a better way. But I like to think that if I was the holdout juror on a case where a human being's life was relying on the jury's decision, I would stand my ground. __________________ We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess. Mark Twain

01-26-2011, 06:26 AM	#4 (permalink)
deportes Psycho	Great story. I was one of two jurors that held out on convicting a person of rape, it seemed to me that most other jurors were willing to convict a person on very weak evidence just so they could move on with their life's. This person was accused of raping his ex partner with whom he had a child and it all happened after he had asked the mother of the child to move to another state where he found work, therefore he was also asking in a round about way for shared custody. She invites over for drinks and dinner at her house and he supposedly allegedly raped her. Next morning she calls a friend then the caps and makes an accusation and goes to the hospital to get a rape test. When the case was presented to us, the accused rapist had already spend a year in jail waiting for this case to be brought to trial. Lost his job out of state and was facing hard time. After listening to the evidence, I thought that the case should be resolved in family counseling not sending a person to jail. Great lesson for me! It appears that lots of jurors do not get paid while serving their civic duty and move fast to convict on weak evidence in order to get back to work.