pameladean | Prospective Juror

Prospective Juror

Oh, boy. I'm now a prospective juror on a trial concerning what sounds like a nasty situation. So far we have all filled out questionnaires, and will be grilled in person tomorrow.

The questionnaire was deeply unnerving. I don't myself feel that "answering honestly" really sorts with Yes or No, even if you can Explain in three lines or even use more paper if you want. I feel that my answers were not consistent and that they'll think I was lying. But I wasn't. I have many mixed feelings and many contradictory opinions.

They ask what TV shows you watch and what your favorite characters are.

They ask if you want to be a juror on this trial. I said that I didn't, well aware that they may be screening just as much for people who want to for creepy reasons.

I would complain for several screens except that, well, whatever ills I think being on this jury may bring, they hardly compare with either being a victim of this crime or with being falsely accused of it.

P.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

They ask what TV shows you watch and what your favorite characters are.

....ok. Now *I* am curious.

You will HAVE to let us know what this is about, if you can, when you can.

What on earth kind of crime would they be looking at what your TV preferences are?!

*baffled*

I don't think it's specific to one kind of crime. After asking generally about TV, they ask about legal and crime shows, and about medical shows. I think they are more looking to see if you believe every word of CSI, or something like that. Conversation in the jury room from people who got as far as the questionnaire and were dismissed suggests that these questions are fairly common.

P.

Aaaahhhh....

Hehe. our judge actually specifically instructed us NOT to watch CSI, or Law & Order or anything like that until after our trial was over, because it could influence us.

...and now i'm not talking anymore about my case, heh. Thank you, tho!

My girlfriend is a forensic DNA analyst, and she testifies in court all the time -- you're absolutely right, they're looking for people who watch and believe CSI, because the "CSI effect" is growing more and more common with juries nationwide. People expect the prosecution to be able to turn up DNA evidence for everything, of a type and style which just isn't possible in the Real World. It's been pretty widely discussed (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22CSI+effect%22), and it's becoming a serious problem in criminal justice. (The Girl gets subpoenaed regularly to testify, for instance, that no DNA samples were found...)

(The CSI effect is also making people smarter about how they commit crime, too.)

A surprising number of people believe that CSI is real, and are looking for that kind of forensic analysis in real trials.

B

Well of course it's real--they couldn't show it on TV if it weren't!

Yes, yes I am quoting a fellow jurist.

Sometimes, you have to wonder what planet these people are living on.

B

Earth, unfortunately...

I'm with you on the "unfortunately" part.

B

...and you voted for George W. Bush in the last election because he will lower taxes, protect the environment, and control terrorism too, right? Yeah, I thought so.

Oy. Someone missed out on a very important stage of early childhood development. And evidently never watches science fiction (except CSI.)

I'll be over here, whimpering.

Interesting...maybe almost too interesting?

Way too interesting. My most common thought this week has been, "I want to go home now."

P.

this sounds scary. i have jury duty on the 22nd; i've never had it before.

This is my first time too.

Maybe you'll get a nice civil trial. Or nothing at all. Hennepin County has a huge caseload; your location may have much less going on.

P.

The last time I had jury duty (we have a one-day, one-trial system here), during voir-dire I told the attorneys that I didn't believe anything any police officer said, nor would I believe anything anyone paid by the government said. (All of which is true.)

They couldn't wait to get rid of me.

I'm not sure most of my opinions are radical enough, but we'll see what happens.

P.

Oh dear. I'm sorry. T goes up for jury duty on the 17th -- it seems to be jury duty season for people I know all of a sudden.

I wonder if things get more crowded in the spring?

I hope T has a nice easy time of it.

P.

I told him to say 1) people charged with any sort of crime are probably guilty even if they say they didn't do it and 2) he is absolutely one hundred percent totally completely against the death penalty if he wants to get out of it. Ha. He seems to be looking forward to it, tho.

That sounds very unpleasant.

It probably doesn't help that I could wish more jurors were people like you: intelligent and sympathetic people who read widely, don't think in yes/no binaries, and understand what is and isn't evidence.

Well, that thought, though somewhat less flatteringly phrased, is in my head too -- I'm very scatterbrained and muddleheaded, but I wouldn't mind having me on a jury if only I were somebody else.

P.

At least it'll be a research experience.

I'd flunk the TV question, as I have flunked every TV question for years.

I wonder if they cherry-pick juries in Canada the way they do in the US or if they go for the "here are 12 random people, like them or lump them", approach like they do in Britain?

I don't think you can flunk the TV question.

They might prefer somebody who never looked at TV. I don't think they really care for its influence, overall. And they don't like people watching the news if they might see something about the trial.

P.

Remember Alice's Restaurant, when Arlo goes into his "kill" routine? "I wanna eat dead burnt bodies..." you probably know the rest.

It doesn't take much to get you 'excused for cause'.

As for the TV preferences? That's easy. If you watch court shows like Law and Order (and you are fairly suggestible) they might not want you. If you watch shows like CSI - they might not want you.

Lawyers - defending or opposing - want people who can be easily led, not necessarily independent thinkers.

Good luck.

Fiction certainly gives me the impression the lawyers always both want sheep on the jury. I'd think much of the time one of the lawyers would want smart people who could cut through the obfuscation provided by the other lawyer to see the clear truth of this lawyer's arguments; but maybe any case that actually goes to trial is a case balanced on the knife-edige, and neither attorney can feel confident.

Well, as I said, someone who is easily led is always best. No hung juries that way.

I'm a little jaded, I guess, since I work in a law school (and seriously wonder about the state of our judicial system).

My mother was once on a jury from whose larger panel had been removed everybody with a college degree. She found that pretty spooky. So maybe my M.A. will get me off. I'm afraid I have to stick to the truth -- so limiting.

Thanks for the good wish.

P.

It seems to vary: the one time I had jury duty they kept the two people with advanced degrees and removed all the people who *hadn't* been to college.

Look, if they'd ever asked me "Do you watch CSI?" I'd have been honestly able to respond, "What's 'CSI'?"

But "What TV shows do you watch?" That's just creepy, and deserves one and only one answer: MYOB. If they want to know what that stands for, I'll tell them.

That hadn't occurred to me as a possible answer. Next time I think I'll use it. Or just leave the question blank.

There's something intensely intimidating about the questionnaire. I didn't like it at all.

P.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Prospective Juror

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

The CSI Effect

Re: The CSI Effect

Re: The CSI Effect

Re: The CSI Effect

Re: The CSI Effect

Re: The CSI Effect

Re: The CSI Effect

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject