Jury Duty

Post Reply New Topic

As you pointed out, there is a lot of idealism in my positions, on those political spectrum tests you can find online or whatnot, I always land right where Ghandi and the Dalai Lama do.

Trying to describe it is rather like trying to tell someone about a painting you've yet to make, I can see the structure in my head, and I can turn it into language to some extent, but it isn't actually the same as the finished result.

That's a perfectly fair answer. I hope that, over time, you can find the words to articulate your vision.

The realist says, "make your way through the world, and do what's practical." The idealist says, "I have a better way." That's the story that I would like to hear.

Something did come to mind last night actually.

It is something which I subconsciously realized years ago: the internet is the most powerful tool for the proliferation of memes that has ever existed.

Ideals such as I am talking about make excellent memes, when you can insert something into someones world view which feels more wrong to leave out, that is powerful. Except historically this has been the purvue of religious memes, nonetheless, it is hard to deny that if YOU want your right to live without being attacked, you have to respect that right for everyone else, logically.

So you can imagine a bacterial culture growing, bit by bit, in small isolated spots, then rapidly surging out, merging, and spreading further.

Except it's an idea virus, online.

In our county it must be filled out and accepted BEFORE you are summoned.

But, then, who should pass the judgement? There can be no rule of law without someone making the decision on what has happened and if the law applies. Someone has to step outside of knowledge and make a decision about a situation they did not witness. Thus, the decision to ask 12 normal citizens to serve on a jury; for that process to be shared by fellow citizens.

---

Reading further, I realize you've progressed further into the discussion. But ... all that, I don't have time to get into. Just acknowledging it.

.

Last edited by DW_a_mom on 16 Apr 2010, 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think you have the option of going to the judge and retracting your vote, thus forcing a mistrial. But making that sort of move takes a really forceful personality, and it is a lot to ask of someone.

I found jury duty to be emotionally very difficult, as well, and the case I served on (before I started to lose my hearing) was a civil trial, not a criminal one. Still, I always felt that the jury as a whole had not gone carefully enough through the process, and had short changed the guy bringing the lawsuit as a result. I ended up relenting mostly because I felt the case was brought after the statute of limitations, but there was never a through discussion on it, and I felt that should have happened. I've always felt bad about not forcing it, and that was in a case where the result probably would never have changed, so I cannot even begin to imagine the pressure you were under. I am sorry to hear about your experience. But, seriously, if I were the one in the defendent's chair, would I want someone like you on my jury? YES. You heart was in the right place even if the bad behavior of your fellow jurors and your disability (in this case, your AS did become a disability) made it impossible to follow. That is a better shot for the defendent that should not go to jail than no one at all on their side. Few can withstand the type of pressure you were under.

If I were you, I would use your story to get a medical excuse going forward. Why even worry about being called again? If you reach a space where you think you could handle it at some future date, you can pull the medical excuse. I am working on a medical excuse due to my progressive hearing loss, because I feel defendents have a right to have their cases accurately heard, and I can no longer do that. Clearly, you think your AS and meltdowns keep you from being able to be the type of juror you want to be, and that you think defendents deserve you to be. So, get the waiver.

A group of people chosen to consider and arbitrate fairly is a nice idea, it is simply one that is exercised in a manner currently which I can not morally accept.

I got called up for jury duty recently. I think I'll go to it.

Bring a book, or your tablet.

My brother got called from jury duty once, and he asked if he can be excused from it because he had depression. We didn't think they would take it as a valid excuse, but funnily enough they sent a letter back saying he can be excused from it. So I'm sure being on the spectrum can be a valid excuse too, although I don't know about America.

I also have ADHD so I find it difficult to sit for long periods of time and pay attention. I don't think I will make a very good juror.

Not in the US. They won’t excuse you from jury duty unless (possibly) you have an official diagnosis.

In NYC, one usually serves a couple of days or so, then is exempt for 8 years.

i hate it. plain and simple.

When I got a jury duty summons , sent a copy of the autism diagnosis report and it did not bother me again

Since I do not want to "come out" as having an ASD, I devised a method that works, although I still have to show up for the selection process.

When the judge asks me if I can render a fair and impartial verdict, I say...

"No, your honor, I cannot. From the information already presented in this courtroom, I believe the prosecution has enough evidence to convict the defendant, and that any further proceedings would be a mere formality toward the inevitable verdict."

Kinda long-winded, and the other prospective jurors are usually horrified, but it has worked three times in a row so far!

At my age I thought I would have had to do jury duty by now but no.

A friend of mine has done it, it lasted 2 weeks for her and she wouldn't tell me what it was about, still hasn't.

In Australia I'm wondering how they pick jurors.

A lack of patience (which may or may not be related to my ASD) would render me a useless juror.

Someone who is a friend of the family got excused because he stated that his form of Christianity meant that he couldn't possibly judge.