Jury Duty

[PerryGroves]

I must have chucked the original notice, am up for jury duty on Monday, possible 10 week trial. I got out of it before due to a Uni exam but that was 20 years ago and apparently in NSW, you just get called again straight away if you come up with an excuse nowdays.

I'm happy to do my bit, but 10 weeks, jaysus.

Anyone done a big stint on a jury, am thinking if I get called I might as well be the foreman, most punters can't make a decision to tie their shoe laces at least if I'm in charge I can keep the process moving.

Any thoughts on how to play it.

[Shadesy]

When you get called up to the stand say you are prejudice against all *insert stereotype Here* and you will be excused.

I got called into the stand as I went to Pledge they challenged me and that was that.

[sms316]

When you get called up to the stand say you are prejudice against all *insert stereotype Here* and you will be excused.I got called into the stand as I went to Pledge they challenged me and that was that. +1. I know a guy who got excused after saying "I hate wogs!".

[Goldy]

Say "I hate criminals, and I assume if you're here you must be guilty of something"

[razaar]

You don't get to say anything. If your number is selected you will be accepted by both sides or challenged. If accepted you will be sworn into that jury. If challenged you get to go home until they need to sellect other juries. You will be on call usually for 2 weeks, and will need to check the Court's web site daily if your number is required.

[Pencil]

Just get the guy an evil stare as you walk to the jury box. Defence lawyer is bound to challenge.. Or do what I did and just don't show, pay the fine and move on.

Edit, bear in mind the time before I did a 3 week trial. I've never been so bored in my life.

[Eldrick]

Grow a Hitler moustache

[Webster]

Walk into the courtroom with a stiffy.

[rubin]

Walk into the courtroom with a stiffy.

U might also get arrested if its a sexual assault case....

[Webster]

It's not against the law to have a stiffy (unless he pops his head out for a look)

[rubin]

It's not against the law to have a stiffy (unless he pops his head out for a look)

True.

[Mububban]

I'm 33 and never been called yet. A mate of mine is 36 and has been called 4 times in the last 5 years. Sucks to be him.

[Dotty]

A normally white-collar bloke at work didn't get picked, when he wore a union T shirt and badges for jury duty.

[Bruce]

Or maybe consider actually doing it, instead of leaving the job to idiots too stupid to get out of doing jury duty.

If you've ducked out of jury duty you have waived your right to complain about the courts and any of their decisions.

[sms316]

Or you can get Bruce to take your place.

[dan]

I've been called 3 times. The first I went just to experience what it was about. Sat in a large room for half the day with a couple hundred others waiting for my name to be called. Never got called. Got paid some pissy amount. The next two times I just said i'm self employed and that got me out of it.

[Cosmopolite]

I must have chucked the original notice, am up for jury duty on Monday, possible 10 week trial. I got out of it before due to a Uni exam but that was 20 years ago and apparently in NSW, you just get called again straight away if you come up with an excuse nowdays.

I'm happy to do my bit, but 10 weeks, jaysus.

Anyone done a big stint on a jury, am thinking if I get called I might as well be the foreman, most punters can't make a decision to tie their shoe laces at least if I'm in charge I can keep the process moving.

Any thoughts on how to play it.

Jeebus that must be some serious charge for a 10 weeker. I did a 2day stint and that was bad enough. it is very hard to keep awake.

[Webster]

Has Dave1 ever been on a jury?

[markTHEblake]

I thought of that, and I am not sure whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing for the defendant.

[rubin]

I thought of that, and I am not sure whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing for the defendant.

I think if it was a youth who may have been "challenged" by drugs and the crime was a cause - Dave would have said not guilty.

If the defendant went to any form of church - Dave would have pushed for the electric chair.

[Webster]

Or if he was charged with attempting to screw the ebay buyer out of additional postage after the auction ended = Dave1 says not guilty (and leaves him positive feedback after the trial ends)

[Mububban]

I'm almost wishing I could get called up for the experience, but I imagine it would also make me lose faith in the jury system knowing how dumb people in groups tend to act.

My missus is a n intelligent woman, she did jury duty for a week and was appalled at the attitude of some of the other jurors. Didn't give a toss about guilty or innocent, didn't pay attention in court, they just wanted to make any old decision so they could go home. That and the way you always get people acting in groups - some lead, some follow, some just sit there quietly and some argue for the sake of arguing.

The "jury of your peers" is a nice concept, but in reality, we all know the broad cross section of smart and dumb that society is made up of. I think I'd rather be judged by a group of experienced judges than Joe Average who doesn't give a shit.

[PerryGroves]

I'm happy to do my bit, but 10 weeks, jaysus


Or maybe consider actually doing it, instead of leaving the job to idiots too stupid to get out of doing jury duty.

If you've ducked out of jury duty you have waived your right to complain about the courts and any of their decisions.

Bruce, thanks for your post, I am doing it, perhaps you missed the part where I say I am happy to do my bit. Anyway, I dont have to go tomorrow and now need to ring up Monday evening to find out if theyy need me.

[Bruce]

I applaud you Perry.

I wasn't singling you out, just offering a counter view from everyone else suggesting weaseling out of it.

[Pieface]

Good on ya PG.

I doubt you'll enjoy the experience if you get picked but I feel pretty much the same way as Bruce.

If you only get juries full of unemployed people and old farts you are going to get verdicts that don't reflect mainstream values.

[goughy]

Never done it. Been called three times from memory, but not for a long time. First time my employer wrote in that it would seriously affect his business. Other two times I owned the business so got out of it.

Rob has done it once. Was a pain in the ass when one of the jury was a bleeding heart greenie. Was a case of assault against a police officer but this chick was adamant that the officer was asking for what he got. In the end she begrudgingly changed her vote just to get out of there.

[PerryGroves]

Well, I got excused from the 10 week trial and will be called again in a month or so. The staff there were indicating that it was more likely that I was likely to get a 2 or 3 weeker.

I was in a queue, they asked could I do the 10 weeks and I said I was on holidays in 3 weeks so I got a walk. People were claiming work however unless they were sole traders they weren't getting excused.

Tip: I got there early and was in and out of the place in under 1/2hr. By the time I was out on the street, the queue was snaking around the building, they will be hours getting processed.

[Mububban]

Rob has done it once. Was a pain in the ass when one of the jury was a bleeding heart greenie. Was a case of assault against a police officer but this chick was adamant that the officer was asking for what he got. In the end she begrudgingly changed her vote just to get out of there.

As I said before, I'd rather be judged by a panel of legal experts than "a jury of my peers." I don't know the facts of the case against the officer, but that one person and her prejudices could have derailed the other 11 jurors.

And then, she rolls over grudgingly and votes against what she believes in, just to get out of there.

[Yossarian]

Yeah a panel of people truly jaded by the system would be awesome.

[Mububban]

Compared to Joe Average who's more concerned about getting home in time to watch his favourite TV show? I'll take the trained professionals thanks. I'd rather someone jaded with knowledge than someone with an opinion but no brains.

[Yossarian]

I probably wouldn't. The jury system works quite well thanks.

[Mububban]

How many have you been on? Can you tell me about your experiences, good or bad?

Because the few people I know who've done it were all disillusioned when they saw some of the numpties who were part of the jury they were on. Maybe you got lucky and had 11 other intelligent people but that sounds like an exception not the norm.

[Yossarian]

How many have you been on? Can you tell me about your experiences?

I have been on zero, and probably never will be on one.

You are basing your numpty theory on a few people, how very scientific.

A few questions if I may.

Where would you source you cadre of seasoned legal experts?

How you would source enough of them to provide for every jury trial?

How would you prevent them becoming jaded by the entire process and start judging on appearance, diction and so on.

What would you pay these people and where would you get the money?

Is one numpty on a jury really a bad thing?

Are you aware you can in some cases apply for a trial by judge alone?

[PerryGroves]

How would you prevent them becoming jaded by the entire process and start judging on appearance, diction and so on.

Yoss, somewhat on the same theme, what is the point of the peremptory challenge system afforded to both the prosecution and Crown?

As a juror you turn up ready to do your job and for some reason (never explained) you are deemed unworthy. On my read this is judged on appearence and whatever other morsel of information they have (presumably where you live).

Seems a waste of time, here is your twelve, suck it up, assuming selection is a random walk, let's start.

[Yossarian]

To try and improve the impartiality of the jury and remove bias, both ways. I also see it as a bit of a waste of time and it seems to be something of a historical hangover.

[Dotty]

I'm not allowed to swap over the broken light fitting in the hallway.

But they expect me possess the ability to determine whether someone is entitled to life of incarceration.

The system is flawed.

[Mububban]

A few questions if I may.


Where would you source you cadre of seasoned legal experts?


How you would source enough of them to provide for every jury trial?


What would you pay these people and where would you get the money?


Not really relevant as someone posting on a golf forum is not going to be consulted if this were actually to be implemented. If the system ever got changed, those in charge would make those decisions, not you or I.



How would you prevent them becoming jaded by the entire process and start judging on appearance, diction and so on.


Professionalism I suppose, screening through the application process, just like filtering applicants for any position, but there's no preventing becoming jaded in any career option. But if they've at least had more legal training than just watching Law & Order, I still think that's a big step up.



Is one numpty on a jury really a bad thing?


I think removing as many as possible is preferable.



Are you aware you can in some cases apply for a trial by judge alone?


Yes.

[Mububban]

I'll leave it at this, it's where I'm largely coming from and what we've seen posters here confirm - they get out of it if they can, so it's not a true cross section of society. Hence my suggestion of having "professional" jurors.
Fix the reasons why people dodge jury duty and juries should again be a better representation "of your peers."



Jury service is a vital part of the justice system but it won’t work if our juries are made up of a tiny part of the community, such as retirees or the unemployed. The system needs to be fixed so we get a true cross section of the community serving on juries.


Small wonder some potential jurors seek ways to avoid jury service. Jury service disrupts their lives and high income earners are reluctant to commit weeks of their time to a trial where they will be financially worse off. Consequently a segment of the community professionals and executives, is not always represented on a typical jury.


If economic necessity is driving some potential excellent jurors away from jury service, we need to fix the system. We need to have jurors who can afford to focus on the case before them, rather than be worrying about lost income as a trial drags on.
How we motivate the “missing” jurors to take part in jury service is the challenge facing the Australian justice system. Until we find a solution, the quality of justice is being eroded.

[AndyP]

I've just received notice. I doubt that I can afford time off work to do it though, but that's up to my employer to decide.

[PerryGroves]

I've just received notice. I doubt that I can afford time off work to do it though, but that's up to my employer to decide.

Unless you are self employed don't go with "we are too busy at work, your employer has to give you the time.

If you get a 3 week trial, chance your arm, its probably as good as you get, if you get a 10 weeker or more, claiming a holiday (already booked) worked for me albeit I will be called again shortly.

[AndyP]

I don't want the time if work suffers, and it will, since I'm in a two man team and I already have two weeks leave leading into the jury duty.

[Ducky]

You could be missing out on this (http://www.news.com.au/news/brittni-colleps-accused-of-having-group-sex-orgy-with-four-students-filmed-on-a-mobile-phone/story-fnejlrpu-1226452018921)!


"The videotape from the incident was played in the courtroom."

[PerryGroves]

The year long jury duty for PG has come to an end, prolonged by me mainly. I got sent a letter 5 times during the year, 3 times I was travelling for work or holidays, one time my panel wasn't called and today it finished in what can only be described as lucky for me although not for one girl who was looking fwd to being off work.

Got there at 9am and finally went into the courtroom at midday, trial was supposed to be 8 weeks according to my notice. Abou 25-30 of us went into the courtroom, at this point they tell us the trial us likely only 4 days, blessed relief. 12 got called including me and we went into the jury box. The prosecution challenged 3 old people, I must have been close. Crown challenged one sullen youth. You don't say anything, you just stand up, I still maintain this challenge system is a stupid process. So I'm in

Anyway the judge droned on for an hour, we had lunch and came back at 2pm. More procedeural stuff, opening remarks, the first witness gets up, questioned by the Crown, defence then questions, the witness says something wrong and we are led out. Back in after half an hour and its a mistrial. GOLD, outta there at 4pm.

I believe in the jury system but by god it must bore the participants to drink, so much pfaffing for so little progress.

[BenM]

Thanks for sharing PG. Quite interesting and quite timely, since I just got the call up letter in the mail today.

I deferred for 6 months when I was asked last year - they said they'd call me again and I wouldn't be able to get out of it next time... whaddya know, they did. Unfortunately the date they want me there is the date we move into our new house, the removalists are already booked, I am hoping I will be able to defer again.

Otherwise I would be quite happy to do it.. civic duty and all that.

[dc68]

The year long jury duty for PG has come to an end, prolonged by me mainly. I got sent a letter 5 times during the year, 3 times I was travelling for work or holidays, one time my panel wasn't called and today it finished in what can only be described as lucky for me although not for one girl who was looking fwd to being off work.

Got there at 9am and finally went into the courtroom at midday, trial was supposed to be 8 weeks according to my notice. Abou 25-30 of us went into the courtroom, at this point they tell us the trial us likely only 4 days, blessed relief. 12 got called including me and we went into the jury box. The prosecution challenged 3 old people, I must have been close. Crown challenged one sullen youth. You don't say anything, you just stand up, I still maintain this challenge system is a stupid process. So I'm in

Anyway the judge droned on for an hour, we had lunch and came back at 2pm. More procedeural stuff, opening remarks, the first witness gets up, questioned by the Crown, defence then questions, the witness says something wrong and we are led out. Back in after half an hour and its a mistrial. GOLD, outta there at 4pm.

I believe in the jury system but by god it must bore the participants to drink, so much pfaffing for so little progress.


Exactly the same as what happened last time I was called for jury duty.

I was saying thank **** for that too..... Was a case of a grandfather diddling his grand-daughter.

[Johnny Canuck]

Lucky man, DC. It would have been tough to stay in the juror's box and not jump over and punch him in the melon.

[IanO]

A guy I work with just spent 3 months on jury duty on a accidental homicide case. Has some very interesting tales to tell but is a financial disaster for him. He is a sales guy and so has missed all his sales targets so lost a large portion of his normal wages for 3 months.

[PerryGroves]

A guy I work with just spent 3 months on jury duty on a accidental homicide case. Has some very interesting tales to tell but is a financial disaster for him. He is a sales guy and so has missed all his sales targets so lost a large portion of his normal wages for 3 months.

IanO, I feel for the bloke, from my massive (1 day) experience, my frustration at the delays was high, your man would have been sitting around watching the dollars fall through his fingers. Plenty of time to think with no mobiles.

The whole thing takes so long because the courts hardly work. 10-11.30, 12-1, 2-4. so only 4 1/2 hours per day, less all the other pfaffing and posturing they do.

[IanO]

Before they started the deliberation, after all the evidence, the judge took TWO days to explain the definitions of murder, manslaughter, homicide, etc. Did his head in.

[Pencil]

I got stuck on one nearly 5 years ago. The trial dragged on for about it 3 weeks, I've never been so bored in my life. Worst part was that it was a grooming minors charge. We had all decided after the first few days that he did it but the next 2 weeks were just hell. Heard a lot of things I still can't get out of my head.

[goughy]

Clikchic sat through a case of assault on a police officer. Guy kicked out of pub causing trouble, when cop come he hits him before being arrested. One bleeding heart greenie in the 12 had the case go 3 days. She believed the cop used excessive force and the guy was just defending himself.

[G.K]

I had the experience of sitting on a manslaughter case a few years back. Ended up lasting for about 3 weeks. It's a damn good test of your concentration levels that's for sure.
It was a good experience but as mentioned previously, there is often plenty stuffing around with legal arguments etc that it can be a long drawn out process.
After the case, the judge advised us all that if we happened to be called up again within the next 10 years that we should request a pardon from duty based on having sat on the case. As it happens, I was lucky? enough to receive another two letters during this time. Responded to them accordingly and was excused, no questions asked. Prior to this case, I had received a notice twice but was excused based on the fact that I was working as an apprentice at the time.
The 10 years is now up. And given my track record, I won't be surprised to receive another notice. I surprises me that others I know who are a similar age have never received a notice but I have had five over the years.

[markTHEblake]

Clikchic sat through a case of assault on a police officer. Guy kicked out of pub causing trouble, when cop come he hits him before being arrested. One bleeding heart greenie in the 12 had the case go 3 days. She believed the cop used excessive force and the guy was just defending himself. It is Queensland. Was that the case where the guy struck the policemen in the knee with his groin? That Is statutory assault here, will never get away with self defence on that one.

[dc68]

I see a deaf woman is suing us (QLD Gov) for discrimination because she's been excluded from jury duty due to her disability. What a joke can you imagine the difficulty in having a deaf person on a jury with the need for translators/repetitions etc?

[Hatchman]

I see a deaf woman is suing us (QLD Gov) for discrimination because she's been excluded from jury duty due to her disability. What a joke can you imagine the difficulty in having a deaf person on a jury with the need for translators/repetitions etc? I think we've just found another way to waste tax payers money and bog the court system down more.

[Mububban]

It surprises me that others I know who are a similar age have never received a notice but I have had five over the years.

I'm 34 and never been called up yet, someone I know I think has been called 3 times in 6 years. My missus is 36 and been called once.


I see a deaf woman is suing us (QLD Gov) for discrimination because she's been excluded from jury duty due to her disability. What a joke can you imagine the difficulty in having a deaf person on a jury with the need for translators/repetitions etc?

That is ridiculous. How important do people think they are these days? Most people want to avoid jury duty, and she actively wants to seek it out? What a waste of public resources.

[markTHEblake]

Has she had the first hearing yet.

[PerryGroves]

I see a deaf woman is suing us (QLD Gov) for discrimination because she's been excluded from jury duty due to her disability. What a joke can you imagine the difficulty in having a deaf person on a jury with the need for translators/repetitions etc?

Having had some (albeit minimal) experience with deaf people, they are reasonably thrifty to notoriously tight. Most work in low paying affairs, the pay for jury duty after a week service goes up to 250ish dollars per day plus meals and transport. May represent value.

[dc68]

Or the fact she has been "discriminated" against represents a far easier pay day. Call me a cynic but its a load of frogshit.

[PerryGroves]

Or the fact she has been "discriminated" against represents a far easier pay day. Call me a cynic but its a load of frogshit.

There's that as well DC, I am sounding like the greenie in Goughy's story. :oops:

[G.K]

Has she had the first hearing yet.

Boom tish!

[matty]

To get out of JD just casually mention to the person organising the jurors on the day that a friend or relo is in the cops and reckons that if the matter has reached hearing they have done it anyway. The hearing is just mostly to determine the severity of the penalty.

Thanks for coming. Goodbye!