Current Events > The DUmpster

My experience as a prospective juror in a criminal case

(1/3) > >>

CC27:

--- Quote ---no_hypocrisy (45,995 posts)

My experience as a prospective juror in a criminal case
All prospective jurors were under oath to answer truthfully.

I made the first cut. Educated with three degrees and nine years of college and graduate studies.

Then came the survey. Our present employment. What type of media did we regularly engage in. Including social media.

I answered that I was a defense attorney and I didn't entirely trust police to accurately record what actually happened.

I also put down that I was a devotee of MSNBC and regularly viewed Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, Joy Reed, etc. For radio, I listened to WBAI, an independent franchise of Pacifica Radio. I listed one program on it, "On The Count," which is devoted to the rights of convicted inmates.

I was asked if I could listen to this criminal case and remain impartial. I responded that I could.

However, the prosecutors excused me with one of their preemptory challenges. It's their right. My progressive views indicated that I would be a loud voice during deliberations and they just didn't want to take that chance.

So, as far as TSF's team wanting their jury panel to contain just one dissenting voice, it will be difficult. If that one voice lied on his/her survey and his/her "interview" with the judge before being seated, s/he will be removed during deliberations and replaced with an alternate juror. The proverbial fine-tooth comb will be applied to ALL prospects.


https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218867000
--- End quote ---

BLAH BLAH BLAH

fatboy:
I served on a jury last week for a criminal trial. During the jury selection we were asked several times if we could be objective while hearing LEO testimony. There was video of the entire thing, anyone not vision impaired could clearly see the criminal acts. Still, 2 jurors flat out said during deliberation they hate cops. Perp basically walked on the most serious charges.

SVPete:
Among the questions asked of prospective jurors was one about the selection process that was designed to exclude or discourage observant Jews (and Muslims) from participating. Prospective jurors were informed that selection hearings would be held on Fridays and could run past sundown. I guess Bragg and the biased judge are afraid observant Jews would have too strong a sense of what constitutes proof and of justice (and maybe that Muslims are indirectly sympathetic to Trump due to being POed at LIEden).

Old n Grumpy:

--- Quote --- However, the prosecutors excused me with one of their preemptory challenges. It's their right. My progressive views indicated that I would be a loud voice during deliberations and they just didn't want to take that chance.
--- End quote ---

It’s more likely they bumped you because you’re a loudmouth asshole That would second-guess everything the prosecutor had to say.

You also sound like you’re way too proud of yourself with an oversized ego :thatsright:

Ralph Wiggum:
DUmmy "no hypocrisy" has an awfully high opinion of his/her/itself.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page