Does anyone here like  to go to jury duty?
337841
I've never been called to be on a jury.\n\nMost people I've talked to who have been called to a jury have stated that it was just a waste of their time.\n\nThe concept of a jury is a good one, though, and the purpose it serves is valuable. Having a jury could mean the difference in civil suits where a plaintiff does or does not get the relief they seek. Juries in criminal cases are required since so much of the criminal law has to do with "what was reasonable" and other intangibles that should be left for the "every day man or woman to decide."\n\nTorts cases (and, boy, are there a lot) benefit from juries because the elements of "reasonableness" are present. \n\nJuries, in theory, protect the innocent from being prosecuted unfairly and help to insure that plaintiffs who had been wronged get the damages they are seeking. Juries, however, aren't perfect because they are so often comprised of un-educated people who often let their biases get in the way of justice (only 1/4 of America's adult population is undergraduate college-educated; less than 10% of the adult population has some sort of graduate or professional schooling).
75342
I'm not a lawyer, but Federal Courts typically have jurisdiction over the whole USA.  Moving out of state will not even (automatically) excuse you from ordinary jury duty (personal experience on this), so I'm guessing it's probably more true with a Fed based issue.
668730
No, but I had one filed on me, along with a Psyd, my supervisor and the state.  Never went to trial!\n\nI sat on a jury in a civil case.
165188
I would think someone volunteering for jury duty would be less likely to be unbiased than someone who is required to participate.  Someone willing to forfeit days of their lives to the justice system might be harboring ulterior motives or prejudices that they feel are important and want to affect the outcome of trials.\n\nAlso, it opens the doors for unethical lawyers or others to 'encourage' certain people to volunteer in order to taint or influence jury pool and selection.  \n\nAnd there would be no way to insure random demographics - if only certain people volunteer than that is not random, it is only representative of people who volunteer for jury duty.
380547
Because six or twelve jurors decide your fate. Then all of them have to agree. Its called trial by your peers.
713568
I, personally, take it very seriously. I voted today, went with my 20 years old son. When I leave the polling place I feel like I've let my voice be heard and done my duty as an American citizen. I know it sounds corny and will probably get blasted by someone on here, but I mean it. I love this country and thank GOD that we have the privilege and right to vote!
2909
Don't you have to be an American citizen to be a juror?
1014150
If you are just trolling for a "yes" or "no", my answer is “NO”.  \n\nIf you want more, I have included a personal experience for you to read through.  It is lengthy but when you are asked to kill a man, most issues become more complex.\n\nI spent just over six (6) months of my life sitting on a First Degree with Special Circumstances Murder case.  At the time we submitted our verdict it was the longest jury trial in California history.  During that time I came to some conclusions.\n\nA jury evaluates the evidence put before them.  As a juror I cannot investigate, conduct experiments or do any research.  So if an attorney can get the facts introduced into evidence, they are a good attorney.  There are all sorts of maneuvers and gyrations performed outside of the juries hearing.  Some of those maneuvers establish what a jury will be allowed to hear and see about the case.  The better attorney is the one who can successfully argue to include their evidence while excluding their opponents.  And make no mistake they are opponents.  Our judicial system is an adversarial system.  This is the primary reason juries sometimes return verdicts that the rest of us don’t understand.  The general public watches a defendant “tried” in the press, a jury doesn’t have that luxury.  The rules of evidence are different in Superior Court than they are in news media.\n\nThe only reason attorneys are allowed in a court room at all is so the jury can put witnesses answers into some kind of context.  For example, if the answer is "YES", no one can glean any information from that answer unless they know that the question was "ARE YOU STUPID?".  Then and only then can you assign meaning to the answer.\n\nA jury represents the community.  It is not a rubber stamp for the prosecutor.  Even though, in a similar way, the prosecutor also represents the community.\n\nA jury can select what testimony it believes, disbelieves, and it can go so far as to believe part of a witnesses testimony and not believe the rest.  As a juror you may also assign different values to testimony.  We heard from two doctors.  One worked with the victim for hours, the other only minutes.  The longer duration doctor’s testimony weighed more heavily in my verdict than did the short duration doctor.\n\nDepending on the jury you sit on (criminal or civil) you must be convinced "beyond a reasonable doubt" or convinced by the "preponderance of the evidence" respectively.  Beyond a reasonable doubt sounds simple but if you have never searched your soul, you don't know what it means.  To me it means putting someone in a death chamber and being able to sleep with that decision.  It doesn’t mean he probably did it, he surely did, or he almost certainly did it.  The preponderance of the evidence is simply more than half.  At least that is my feeling at the moment.  I have never sat through a civil trial so I reserve the right to change my mind on this issue.  The Constitution states 'no man shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process'.  Beyond a reasonable doubt applies to life and liberty as well as property in the form of a fine.  The preponderance of the evidence applies to civil law, i.e. a monetary settlement.\n\nI jury doesn't decide guilt or innocence.  Their verdict is either "guilty" or "not guilty",  Guilty is obvious, the prosecutor has demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime he or she has been charged with.  Not guilty is not a finding of innocent, it is a finding of "not guilty".  It means the prosecutor has failed to prove beyond a reasonable that the defendant is guilty.  Some places and some people can have a finding of “factually innocent”, but I’m certain exactly how that works.  I would assume the defendant proved beyond a reasonably doubt that someone else did it.  Keep in mind though, t
65102
Don't. It is your civic duty. Some employers even pay you your regular pay while your gone. That means you could get a little mini paid vacation. Even if not you shouldn't try to get out of it.\n\nIf you have a legit. reason not to participate in jury duty, that reason alone should be enough to get you off. ex: If you know one of the parties personally. If that is the case you can not be a part of the jury because you would not be impartial.
602567
There are only a few reasons a judge will accept. You can be exempt from jury duty if you have a really important job like a surgeon or an emergency room nurse. You can get out of it if you are the sole caretaker of small children. Finally, you can be exempt if you have a language barrier or an illness/infirmity that make it impossible for you to understand English or come to the courthouse. \nIf none of that applies to you then you still come down to the courthouse for selection. But cheer up!\nYou may not get picked for a jury after all if it is discovered during questioning that you have a racial, ethnic or gender bias against one of the parties involved or have been exposed to too much media surrounding the case and admit that you cannot be open-minded about the facts of the case.
683037
OK, first I'll answer your question, then I have to get on my soapbox again.  (I'll warn you when I get there so you can stop reading if you want).\n\nJury duty is a requirement of citizenship.  When summoned into court, you must appear or be subject to (which means sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't) a warrant being issued for your arrest.  I know some counties are really cracking down now on jury dodgers while others still let it slide.  And yes, I have seen it happen where a whole group ignored their summons and they were all brought before the court and offered an option of either paying $5000, serving 5 days in jail or signing up for jury duty (amazing all of them signed up.)\nWhen you go in for jury duty, each court will have a specified list of exceptions (financial hardship etc.) which can either then excuse your service for that year or postpone it for a time. (not everyone is called every year - its' random, but you only have to serve once in a year's time max.) Again, that will vary by court.  Remember though that any questioning done or forms filled out on those exceptions are done under penalty of perjury (a crime) so those who lie, could be caught although I am not sure if that has ever happened or if it has how prevalent it is.\n \nSoapbox time.\nThe ONLY requirement for citizenship is jury duty.  YES it is inconvenient as hell.  BUT, if you or one of your family was in a situation where you needed the court system, I bet you'd hope for good people to come do their duty, right?\nWe are not required to serve in the armed forces and voting is not mandatory, SO, if your life is a little messed up for a couple weeks, it seems to me to be a small price to pay for the freedoms we have. And those who can but refuse to serve are awfully petty and not carrying their weight.
654530
Fully Informed Jury Association. Their mission is to inform jurors of their rights and responsibilities if they are called for duty. \n\nIf you are called for Jury Duty:\n\nDon't worry! Be happy! Look at jury service as an opportunity to "do good" for yourself and others. It's your chance to help the justice system deliver justice, which is absolutely essential to a free society.\n\nAlso, you can do more "political good" as a juror than in practically any other way as a citizen: your vote on the verdict is also a measure of public opinion on the law itself--an opinion which our lawmakers are likely to take seriously. Short of being elected to office yourself, you may never otherwise have a more powerful impact on the rules we live by than you will as a trial juror.\n\nHowever, unless you are fully informed of your powers as a juror, you may be manipulated by the less powerful players in the courtroom into delivering the verdict they want, instead of what justice would require. That is why this was written--to give you information that you're not likely to receive from the attorneys, or even from the judge.\n\nJustice may depend upon your being chosen to serve, so here are some "words to the wise" about how to make it through voir dire, the jury selection process: You may feel that answering some of the questions asked of you would compromise your right to privacy. If you refuse to answer them, it will probably cost you your chance to serve. Likewise, if you "talk too much"--especially if you admit to knowing your rights and powers as a juror, as explained below, or that you have qualms about the law itself in the case at hand, or reveal that you're bright, educated, or are interested in serving! So, from voir dire to verdict, let your conscience be your guide.\n\nNothing in the U.S. Constitution or in any Supreme Court decision requires jurors to take an oath to follow the law as the judge explains it or, for that matter, authorizes the judge to "instruct" the jury at all. Judges provide their interpretation of the law, but you may also do your own thinking. Keep in mind that no juror's oath is enforceable, and that you may regard all "instructions" as advice.\n\nUnderstanding the full context in which an illegal act was committed is essential to deciding whether the defendant acted rightly or wrongly. Strict application of the law may produce a guilty verdict, but what about justice? If the jurors agree that, beyond a reasonable doubt, the accused did act as charged, then "context becomes everything" in reaching a verdict you can live with. Credit or blame for the verdict will go to you, so be sure to ask the judge how you can pose questions to witnesses, so that you can learn the complete context, should the lawyers fail to bring it out. \n\nWhen they believe justice requires it, jurors can refuse to apply the law. Jurors have the power to consider whether the law itself is wrong (including whether it is "unconstitutional"), or is being applied for political reasons. Is the defendant being singled out as "an example" in order to demonstrate government muscle? Were the defendant's constitutional rights violated during the arrest? Much of today's "crime wave" consists of victimless crimes--crimes against the state, or "political crimes", so if you feel that a verdict of guilty would give the government too much power, or help keep a bad law alive, just remember that you can refuse to apply any law that violates your conscience.\n\nProsecutors often "multiply charges" so the jury will assume the defendant "must be guilty of something". But one of the great mistakes a jury can make is to betray both truth and conscience by compromising. If you believe the defendant is not guilty of anything, then vote "not guilty" on all counts.\n\nYou can't be punished for vo
515619
Don't worry I got a letter to be on jury duty while I was in JAIL!!! LOL So my mom sent the letter back and told them that. \n\nThe next year I got another one and went to it. It was for a DWI case, well I had 2 DWI's and of course they didn't pick me. \n\nJust because you get summoned to go doesn't mean your going to be on it. They summoned around 20-30 people on mine and only 8 or 12 actually was on the jury duty for the case. 8 I'm leaning toward. \n\nSo go and just say you agree with what the person did and you won't have to serve!!! :)
289987
Sure can.\n\nThe only thing that would keep your from being a juror is a prejudice in the case. Such as knowing the parties or having a strong opinion on the case.\n\nA good understanding of the law is a good benefit for the jury. you would add more meaning to a verdict.
775704
Sorry, she is required by law to appear on the date, time and at the place shown on the Summons.  She can explain her circumstances to the Judge and she may be excused for said jury duty.  \n\nGood Luck and Take Care
716177
I would if I could but I am not registered.\n\nRepublicans all the way!
1119035
Depending on the laws of your state, you could be in contempt of court; subject to fines and possible jail time. If jury duty presents a hardship to you, you should contact the clerk of courts and explain why you can't attend. It used to be in my state (Ohio) that if you were a member of the clergy, officer of the court (attorney) or physician, you were excused automatically. They changed that; I don't know what your state laws/local rules provide, but simply ignoring the summons is not a good idea.