Comments on: Juror privacy and voir dire, cont’d

By: September 29 roundup

September 29 roundup — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 02:51:20 +0000

[…] Snooping on jurors’ online profiles? “Everything is fair game” since “this is war”, says one jury consultant [L.A. Times; earlier] […]

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:22:58 +0000

JTT,

You are either horrendously naive or being dishonest.

The statistics on who gets picked for juries, the VAST volume of data on how to pick juries most likely to side with you, and the huge amounts of money spent on jury selection experts each provide ample rebuttal to your claims on their own.

On the statistics point, in particular, are you stating that the well-educated are disprotionayely “kooks” (for one side of the other) or biased? Because the better one’s education, the more likely one is to be excused from jury duty…

The system IS broken, and badly so.

By: JTT

JTT — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:34:09 +0000

Bruce Lagasse,

No one is entitled to “a random jury of one’s peers.”

Jury selection is not broken, it’s a system that works very well. Both sides usually get to knock off the other side’s kooks, leaving a pretty unbiased panel. There are always exceptions, usually resulting from overly friendly venues, but the system works very well. I have picked a lot of juries and have never felt like I picked one that was biased against me.

By: Charlie Bratten

Charlie Bratten — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 14:06:05 +0000

I wonder what the reaction would be if a juror cited Roe vs. Wade as a universal right to privacy.

By: Bruce Lagasse

Bruce Lagasse — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:39:21 +0000

I wonder if the motivation for invasive questions might vanish if the courts just did away with peremptory challenges altogether. That is, just go with the basic questions on legal qualifications as mentioned by Charlie Bratten. A “random jury of one’s peers” is hardly the case with lawyers basically hand-picking the jurors.

By: Todd Rogers

Todd Rogers — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:27:13 +0000

Bob. Might the employer not be the same one who pays the judge, the clerk, the military, and on..?

By: Ed

Ed — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:11:45 +0000

I agree with Todd. A juror is a temporary employee of the court system. Judges are required to protect the long suffering jurors from gross violations of their Federal ADA rights.

As a matter of fact, violation of jurors’ civil liberties are addition grounds for possible appeal.

By: Bob Neal

Bob Neal — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:45:30 +0000

Todd, who would the ’employer’ be? If the court is an employer in this regard, the FLSA suits will be plentiful since neither minimum wages nor overtime are being paid.

By: Harvey

Harvey — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 14:37:45 +0000

I was asked about possible meds once during jury duty. Now, I wasn’t on any, but I still couldn’t resist quoting my 5th amendment rights. I got tossed from that jury.

By: Todd Rogers

Todd Rogers — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 14:11:32 +0000

Forgive me for what maybe a pedestrian question here. Jurors are typically compensated for their time while serving, albeit little to very little money. As such, does said arrangement qualify as employment and thus make the courts subject to Title VII?