Jury Duty

[cycloneworld]

In voir dire you can only strike three jurors. It could be the side that wanted her out was already out of strikes.

Not based on what happened to me today. Each side had 5 (and each used all 5).

It was an interesting process. Ultimately, I got struck. There were 30 of us in the selection process - 12 seated as jurors and I counted 18 alternates. We were asked a bunch of general questions and had to answer them 1 by 1. Then the prosecution and defense did a silent strike process (each got 5 strikes). 9 of the 12 original jurors were "replaced" by 9 of the 18 people sitting with me.

They were going to start the trial immediately after selection and they said the trial would take a few hours to 1 day. It was an evading police with excessive speed case and only 3 witnesses (3 police officers) were scheduled to be witnesses. Seemed like a very straightforward and efficient process.

Glad I didn't get picked but after hearing it would only be another 1 day max, I'm a little disappointed as it would have been cool to see things through. But I was back at work 3 hours after I showed up to the courthouse.

I got summoned and called it and it was for one trial so I did my duty and am out of the pool for now I would guess.

 

[cycloneworld]

Is it weird that I’ve been of age for a couple decades now and have never been selected? This isn’t the first time I’ve heard of people being selected over short periods of time.

This was my first summons in almost 22 years of being eligible. And I had to report AND went through the voir dire process. My wife has been summoned 3 times but has called the night before and never had to actually report.

 

[harimad]

Whatever previous crimes the accused may or may not have committed don't impact whether he or she is guilty of the crime they are on trial for this time.

The past behavior or history of prior infractions more likely impacts the sentencing. A person with a long history of misbehavior is less likely to get probation, or deferred sentence, but it shouldn't change the guilt or non-guilt of a separate incident.

It's funny that you got a "disagree" on this post, because it is just about word for word what the officers of the court will advise you during a trial.

 

[harimad]

Which Illinois politician was it?

Several, not surprisingly.

 

[carvers4math]

I got summoned and called it and it was for one trial so I did my duty and am out of the pool for now I would guess.

My BIL who got booted in Polk County tried his bs that my husband’s job should keep him out of jury duty, and the clerk’s office just said his voir dire appearance made him good for at least two years.

 

[mkadl]

I am selected in April. My last tour of jury duty, was a guy fighting a speeding ticket and defending himself. The Assistant County Attorney was prosecuting. I was named foreman. We listened, voted, found guilty. Everyone had left it was 12 noon. They didnt feed us, we had to wait until everyone got back from lunch. No they didnt feed us. Interesting side note the Assistant County Attorney is now the Iowa Supreme Court Chief Justice.

 

[carvers4math]

I was six months pregnant when I had jury duty. Not sure if my huge bag of snacks would be allowed into the courthouse now.

 

[JM4CY]

I am selected in April. My last tour of jury duty, was a guy fighting a speeding ticket and defending himself. The Assistant County Attorney was prosecuting. I was named foreman. We listened, voted, found guilty. Everyone had left it was 12 noon. They didnt feed us, we had to wait until everyone got back from lunch. No they didnt feed us. Interesting side note the Assistant County Attorney is now the Iowa Supreme Court Chief Justice.

Speedy Gonzalez should of atleast paid for everyone to get jimmy johns.

 

[Donqluione]

Have been called more times than I can remember, in most situations a waste of time because will be struck due to professions of myself or family members. Most interesting, for which I was struck, was in Federal District Court for an accountant who allegedly was laundering funds for a motorcycle gang. Was to be a very long trial, and some potential jury members did things to get dismissed, that made the judge furious and almost got those individuals jailed for contempt of court. They only escaped jail out of the judge's concern that a comtempt/jailing might be used to file an appeal if the defendant was found guilty.

In the bizzare category, was foreperson for a civil suit in which all jury members agreed that the defendant was innocent, but 2 jury members still wanted to find in favor of the plaintiff, because they felt sorry for him and wanted to give him a wad of money because of a very painful injury. Took a while to convince them that the innocent defendant shouldn't have to give money to a plaintiff who was clearly responsible for injuring himself, while trespassing on the defendant's property.

 

[Kinch]

During one quarter of being on jury duty there were 7 trials. I was selected for six. On the sixth one I stood up before the clerk drew the next number. The judge asked me to sit down. I told him the clerk I felt the clerk was going to draw 14, my number, next. He laughed and then she drew 14.

 

[Kinch]

On one trial the defendant was charged with possession of Marijuana. One evidence was her cigarette purse that had the joint. Our jury members looked through that and me and another guy noticed a metal foil tube that people used to sniff glue, then illegal. We found the lady guilty and afterwards when talking with the assistant county attorney I pointed out why he didn't charge her with possession of drug paraphernalia as well. He acted like he knew it and then said he just wanted to test us to see if we knew it. What an idiot.

 

[Proton]

This thread is fascinating. Thanks for sharing, everyone.

 

[simply1]

One I was in the pool for was a murder in Ankeny, boyfriend stabbed his girlfriend some terrible amount of times. He wasn’t going to testify and he obviously did it, going for insanity and he wasn’t taking his meds.
One guy said we wouldn’t be there if he wasn’t guilty, over and over so got removed.

 

[dosry5]

I s

It's funny that you got a "disagree" on this post, because it is just about word for word what the officers of the court will advise you during a trial.

I disagreed. While yes, I’m sure that is advised, I can assure you that previous crimes often impact whether or not someone is guilty. I actually agree with the idea that as a jury you shouldn’t base guilt on prior bad acts….however a career in this field shows me that significantly more often than not If you’ve committed or been tried for previous crimes you’re usually guilty this time around.

 

[NWICY]

This would be an interesting jury to be on
View attachment 97298

There is a whole lot going on in those few sentences.

 

[SCNCY]

Whatever previous crimes the accused may or may not have committed don't impact whether he or she is guilty of the crime they are on trial for this time.

The past behavior or history of prior infractions more likely impacts the sentencing. A person with a long history of misbehavior is less likely to get probation, or deferred sentence, but it shouldn't change the guilt or non-guilt of a separate incident.

In @mramseyISU description, the women initiated contact when the guy was sleeping. While the guy went overboard by choking the girl, there is a pattern of behavior by the women. Additionally, the guy, possibly acting in self defense in addition to being in a cycle of beat abuse could have had psychological problems as a result. In abuse situations, the victim feels trapped and doesn't know a way out, did that cause his reaction in this specific event?

I'm not a law expert by any means, and I am sure there is a reason why that was not disclosed, as I partly agree that cases should only include the facts of the event in focus. But sometimes that does not punish those who repeatedly do the same bad things (in this case abusing the guy).

 

[mramseyISU]

In @mramseyISU description, the women initiated contact when the guy was sleeping. While the guy went overboard by choking the girl, there is a pattern of behavior by the women. Additionally, the guy, possibly acting in self defense in addition to being in a cycle of beat abuse could have had psychological problems as a result. In abuse situations, the victim feels trapped and doesn't know a way out, did that cause his reaction in this specific event?

I'm not a law expert by any means, and I am sure there is a reason why that was not disclosed, as I partly agree that cases should only include the facts of the event in focus. But sometimes that does not punish those who repeatedly do the same bad things (in this case abusing the guy).

So the way Iowa law read according to the instructions we were given is your right to self defense ends once you can reasonably escape the situation at least that's how it was 6 years ago. What we were looking at was after he got up he continued to strike her. So we had to convict based on that but the prosecution didn't do a very good job of proving he choked her and legally there is a difference between just hitting someone and choking someone.

 

[JayV]

In @mramseyISU description, the women initiated contact when the guy was sleeping. While the guy went overboard by choking the girl, there is a pattern of behavior by the women. Additionally, the guy, possibly acting in self defense in addition to being in a cycle of beat abuse could have had psychological problems as a result. In abuse situations, the victim feels trapped and doesn't know a way out, did that cause his reaction in this specific event?

I'm not a law expert by any means, and I am sure there is a reason why that was not disclosed, as I partly agree that cases should only include the facts of the event in focus. But sometimes that does not punish those who repeatedly do the same bad things (in this case abusing the guy).

But punishing someone who repeatedly does the same bad things is not the job of the jury. The jury is to find guilt or not guilt of the crime the defendant is on trial for. The judge absolutely knows those facts when it comes to sentencing and takes them into account. That is his or her job. A repeat offender likely gets a longer sentence.

 

[Cloneon]

To my complete surprise I was once chosen for a jury in a gang multiple murder case. My wife had a conniption and her having a serious anxiety disorder, I was able to convince the judge to release me.

 

[JayV]

I s

I disagreed. While yes, I’m sure that is advised, I can assure you that previous crimes often impact whether or not someone is guilty. I actually agree with the idea that as a jury you shouldn’t base guilt on prior bad acts….however a career in this field shows me that significantly more often than not If you’ve committed or been tried for previous crimes you’re usually guilty this time around.

I would agree that for some types of crime previous behavior impacts future behavior. Drug related crimes being one (because addiction is an ahole and tough to beat).

It's the job of the prosecution to provide evidence of guilt of the crime in question. Not guilt of a past crime for which the defendant has already been tried and possibly paid his or her debt to society.

As far as your "career in this field showing you that significantly more often than not If you’ve committed or been tried for previous crimes you’re usually guilty this time around" I don't doubt that one bit. I totally believe you're correct. But that doesn't rise to "beyond a reasonable doubt" which is the measure we use.

I'm guessing we've all done something once that we didn't like, so we never did it again.

Bob Marley sang a song about it.