Why You Were Not Selected for Jury Duty - LL Ep. 5.256

[@chuckcurtin]

The last time I went for jury duty, it was a DWI case. There was no breathalyzer or blood test taken. When they asked for questions, I asked "so all we have is the police officer's word, right". Bam ! I was gone.

[@77gravity]

You were dismissed DURING the trial? Not at jury selection?

[@warriormanmaxx8991]

@@77gravity - Read between the lines ... "The last time I went (to be considered) for jury duty ...." Questions are allowed prior to sitting on a jury. Question answered ?!?

[@77gravity]

@@warriormanmaxx8991 Different countries, different rules, perhaps?

[@tinpony9424]

I asked a similar question during selection for a statutory rape case that had been put off for four years. I asked the attorneys, "So everyone has had four years to get their stories straight?" Same result.

[@jeffholst5658]

Of course there may have been a field sobriety test. Heel to toe walking, touch your nose, etc. The accused can refuse, but might face suspension of his license if the state has an implied consent law. I think a blood test may require a warrant. The FST is captured on the dash cam, so it's not the police officer's word. Of course the dash cam may reveal that the officer is lying about certain matters. In a case I was on, the officer had identified the stop as taking place in a part of town known for having lots of bars, suggesting that was why the defendant had been there. But the dash cam revealed the stop was miles from that part of time. If you know a witness has lied about one thing, you can disregard some or all the rest of his testimony.

[@Jodyrides]

I was called for jury duty. when the two attorneys were sitting there with the clerk of courts and they asked me if there was a reason that I thought I would not be able to render an impartial judgment. I told the clerk, as I pointed to the well-dressed attorney, I already picked this guy to win. Look how professionally he has dressed, he takes this seriously, and look at the other attorney, he’s got a T-shirt under his suit coat on and no socks , how could anyone take this guy seriously. I was the first prospective juror dismissed

[@DovidM]

Played like a Chad!

[@Thoringer]

I have a MS in Counseling Psychology. Bet you, my peers and I have all the Get-out-of-jury-free card. It is so simple: "Do you know the defendant or was he your client?" - "I can neither confirm nor deny he was my client." HIPAA is strict on us.

[@jaeda4632]

I'm an ABA therapist for children. I got called in to jury selection for a child SA case and I was dismissed right away. I'm glad though because I was hoping to not have to hear those details

[@Thoringer]

@@jaeda4632 actually, I just also got called into jury duty... I got the other get-out-of-jury card. It's called a "Permanent Resident Card" - emailed them a pic and they confirmed I'm out.

[@johnbowen2956]

@@Thoringer If you're not a United States citizen, why did your court even send a summons? To my knowledge the courts in San Diego, California, draw names for jury duty from the County Registrar of Voters. Clearly, Permanent Residents do not hold the right to vote, nor do they bear the civic duty of serving on juries.

[@Thoringer]

@@johnbowen2956 because they used USPS mail forwarding as pool. Yes, it is stupid, I know, but that’s the only thing that links me there. My exwife sold the house I lived in once in and had the mail forwarded there. I never lived there.

[@johnbowen2956]

@@Thoringer It sounds as though the San Diego courts have a more efficient way of summoning citizens than your own jurisdiction.

[@DarinMcGrew]

The time I served on a jury, one of the potential jurors was a director-level manager. Neither attorney wanted him on the jury because they didn't want someone who might take charge of the jury. They wanted a jury of 12 peers, not a jury of 1 director and 11 subordinates.

[@RTSOB1]

The "jury of one's peers" is a term often misunderstood to mean a panel of the defendant's economic and/or social equals. In fact, it's a rather outdated term that initially referred to a class of citizenship (a noble or a commoner). In today's parlance, it simply means "a fellow citizen". That could be anyone. But more to your point, I've sat on more than one jury and have noted that there will always be some one member who will attempt to dominate. You hope that person is selected as foreman, so you at least have a chance of getting organized and out of the jury room at a reasonable hour.

[@JeffRyman69]

I'm a retired engineer. I know a lot of other engineers who were rejected for jury duty. We all believe that most attorneys do not want people capable of critical thinking on a jury. They want people who are easily convinced by their arguments (logical or not).

[@RTSOB1]

If you think that non-engineers are not capable of critical thinking, and it appears that you do, perhaps your arrogance was that which excluded you.

[@JeffRyman69]

@@RTSOB1 You miss the point. Many people are capable of critical thinking. It is certainly not exclusive to engineers. But rightly or wrongly engineers have a reputation for being capable of critical thinking so they are sometimes singled out. Most engineers I know who were called for jury duty never got beyond the questions of what is your name and occupation. They weren't questioned long enough to display an attitude of any kind.

[@RTSOB1]

@@JeffRyman69 Your criticism (a result of critical thinking, I presume) is well taken. I think you're missing a point of my point, not well expressed on my part and, in review, rather harsh. My Grandfather was an engineer and two of his sons, including my father, were engineers, Critical thinking certainly played a part in whatever problem they tackled, but it was only a part, and not the whole of their thinking. I think the same is true of anyone, regardless of their profession - you'd be hard pressed to think of a job that doesn't call for at least a degree of critical thinking. The other thing that united my grandfather and his sons is that they were put off by emotional appeals, but I don't want to paint all engineers with the same brush, Perhaps the attorneys you encountered were doing just that, and since many crimes are committed as a result of emotional stress, they excluded you and your fellow engineers, thinking that you would put too much weight on the "how" of the crime and not the "why".

[@Cwgrlup]

I’ve been summoned every 3 years, and each time rejected for jury duty for the past 40 years because my uncle is a superior court judge in the same state. Also because my brother is an attorney. They imply “bias.” Attorneys assume a lot of erroneous things about potential jurors during jury selection, and it’s the court’s loss. This makes me lose faith in the legal system because their selection process is based on faulty and weak rationale, which is itself biased and lacks critical thinking.

[@cedarshoals529]

I was asked during jury selection if I knew any police officers on a personal basis. (I live in a very small town with only 3 cops at the time) I said yes. Lawyer said how many? I said all of them in my town. The courtroom broke out in laughter, possibly because I was very nervous...and I blurted out "I know criminals too!" The judge had to bang the gavel several times to get people to stop laughing.

[@norezenable]

Based on a George Carlin joke: I would make a great juror because I can spot a guilty person just by looking at them.

[@hankkingsley9300]

@@shakdidagalimal don't get me started on the one time that I was the one against 11 that was a long damn week before a directed verdict cost me over a grand lost wages. Even though they're not supposed to do that...

[@2manycatsforadime]

I was on a jury and after going to deliberations and talking with the other jurors I thought to myself. "God help me if I were ever unfortunate to be judged by a jury". It was dreadful.

[@RalphReagan]

I know, right?

[@justabill5780]

I was once told by a lawyer, "If you're guilty, have a jury trial. If you're innocent, request a bench trial".

[@jefferyharper5720]

He didn't practice where judges are appointed.

[@danielczech30]

I've been summoned for jury duty nearly every year after retiring from the Marine Corps. I've never been selected as a juror. Normally I'd have no idea why I was dismissed. On one occasion I had a defense attorney say that he doesn't like veterans on juries because we are too stringent and look at things in black and white and don't see any gray areas when it comes to deciding cases.

[@carguy4658]

While I didn't hear the Attorney say that, I am a 20 year retired Air Force veteran. I was dismissed multiple times, once directly after I had only given my name and that I was retired AF. The Judge did admonish that attorney for being rude.

[@lisagicker5747]

Same here, Air Force 24 years

[@goldpop5001]

Thanks to all you men for your service! Too bad they refuse to use you in other areas of service like this. A tragedy.

[@AZStarYT]

That's what a 'trial' is about: who can present the most persuasive "STORY" - and NOT the "truth". They do NOT want people who can think rationally. I helped a friend with an accident hearing (state prosecuting for 'excessive speed' leading to an accident). It was OBVIOUS the other driver had cut in front of my friend to pull into a driveway, and so quickly that my friend's brakes locked up, she swerved to avoid, but STILL hit the other car's bumper - but NOT so hard to trigger airbag deployment. The other driver claimed whiplash, back injury, etc. . . from a bumper tap, that didn't even scratch the paint. Cop wrote my friend up for excessive speed (over 25 MPH, the posted speed limit). I calculated the speed - from the trial lawyer associations own formulas that they use - to calculate what her speed would've been and it was UNDER 25. We got the police report and that's when things went weird. The cop had literally transposed almost ALL of the facts: color of cars, owners, ending position of cars, etc. I was allowed to give 'expert' witness testimony because of my background in engineering as well as subsequent university lab research. The magistrate IGNORED all those facts on the report - which OBVIOUSLY went to the credibility of the cop, who didn't "witness" the accident, but wrote it up AFTER the fact. The magistrate listened to MY testimony, but wound up IGNORING everything I'd said, math proof with their own formulas, etc., AND that the officer couldn't even get the written report straight - and found AGAINST my friend. Made NO rational sense whatsoever. Courts CANNOT handle rational arguments. What's worse is that once they make a decision, they stick to it any way they can - because they'll lose money if they don't. So this is what happened next. When my friend appealed, which cost $200 in filing fees alone, she was told that she'd be notified of the appeal hearing date. The court NEVER gave her Notice of the appeal hearing, and so it was denied when she didn't show up. Can't trust courts OR cops.

[@jeffholst5658]

Interesting. A friend of mine got a ticket for speeding when he knew that he was far below the speed limit. But he needed to understand why the radar got it so wrong. My friend was a ham radio operator and had an antenna on his car. He did some researcher and determined that the frequency of the radar was such that it would preferentially read the antenna's speed, which would be faster than that of the car as it vibrated when the car went over railroad tracks. He qualified himself as an expert witness and presented his evidence. The court found in his favor.

[@hankkingsley9300]

I got one for going through a traffic Plaza where you had to have a sticker (or stop and pay) and it would not trip if you went faster than 5 miles an hour speed limit right before it was 45 and I got ticketed for 45 in the plaza at five miles an hour and you can't argue with Jughead by saying the light is not going to trip if I was not doing the speed limit so why didn't you write me a ticket for running a red light and of course went to court and lost. All a big racket. That blind drunk old judge would piss himself on the bench. Thought he was Judge Roy but it was just shitified traffic court. No names but on the coast of GA.

[@kevinclark8782]

I served jury duty twice. Then I saw how the system really works when a family member had to go through the process. I WILL NEVER VOTE TO SEND SOMONE TO JAIL AGAIN! The truth plays a very little role in the justice system. The jurors have no idea what the truth really is.

[@wntu4]

I got put in the pool some years ago. When I received the questionnaire in the mail it asked about organizations I belonged to. I knew right then I would never get called and so happily (and truthfully) admitted to being in the NRA. In the two years I was in the pool I was never once called in. :)

[@chemech]

I've been an engineer for quite some time. I have not been selected for a jury since my student days, because during voir dire I give my profession as engineer. Mostly in the criminal courts building here, sometimes in the civil courts. My colleagues almost all have the same experience, to the point where we joke about being called for jury duty as being just a single paid day off under our state's "one day or one trial" system. Steve, maybe *you* would be OK with having a technical person who thinks analytically in the jury box, but I assure you based on both my experience and conversations with attorneys, that *most* attorneys do not want that in any kind of case going to trial.

[@rudytexas6825]

Here's my golden rules: 1- if you want to get off jury duty, ask questions and raise your hands up all the time. 2- if you want to be on a jury to get out of work, don't ask questions just remain silent.

[@robertd6387]

I did this exact thing. Answered every single question asked. Got out pretty quick

[@rudytexas6825]

@@robertd6387 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@arinerm1331]

Steve, while sometimes I submit comments that can best be attributed to the class clown, this time I want to be absolutely clear: This is the best video you've uploaded, by far. It is a brilliant and factual representation of a nuance of jurisprudence that I'm absolutely delighted to see. Also, opposing counsel in your used car dealer case should have seen you handing that juror an agenda from a mile away. Well done!

[@stevelehto]

Thank you. I appreciate the feedback. I sometimes wonder on videos like this - "Is this too esoteric for KZbin?" Glad to hear that it's not!

[@ccrabbit8768]

I agree with this comment. I like the fact that I could understand the engineers question and would have wondered why I got excused. Pointing out that everyone on the jury should have equal input is valuable from the point of view of helping to establish justice is the ideal. I do agree with some other comments that he did stack his own jury on the used car salesmen (thought it could have backfired). The other side should have seen that coming easily though after voir dire and that was their miss. Voir dire is not always to establish a just jury but a jury that will help my side win. (Like the TV series "Bull"

[@tdgdbs1]

My small town in Texas; if you have a graduate degree, your chance of jury duty is slim. If you have a Hispanic last name; you are screwed.

[@hrdkorebp]

I used to be summoned frequently, the last time I informed the court that I refused to have my fourth amendment right violated by an unconstitutional search upon entering the court house. I also stated I refused to give up my second amendment right to carry a firearm but would be willing to have an officer escort me throughout the court house. I was dismissed and haven't been summoned since.

[@stevelehto]

You told them that when you got to the court? After being searched without your gun?

[@hrdkorebp]

Steve Lehto No, through email before the court date.

[@thetruthyes]

I told them the system is corrupt and every cop lies, and that I didn't wanna put up with it especially when they dont pay shit. Plus I have a family to support. They dismissed me.

[@twothreefour234]

I have lived in the same county for 30 yrs. When I first moved here I got the questioner letter for jury duty. At the time, I could not afford more than a day off. I replied. " You can count on my guilty verdict. I support law enforcement 100%". Haven't heard from them since. :)

[@RTSOB1]

Let's hope you're never wrongfully accused. You could have a real problem.

[@jbs.]

I'm an engineer, and gone through voir dire. Basically, from the questioning that I got, they assume that an engineer's definition of 'proof' is different from a lay persons. This is true. I wouldn't call what goes on in a court proceeding 'proof' in most cases.

[@cashstore1]

I was asked what I did for a living and told them I was an electrical contractor. This case was a customer/building contractor dispute. I told them that I understand that contractors can do shoddy work, but I also understood that customers will use a trivial excuse not to pay. I knew that would get me kicked off, and it did.

[@malcolmlyle4910]

I'm am engineer. About 20 years ago, I was in jury duty and served. There were no engineering issues in the case. Bumped into to defense atty about a month after trial - he knew me by name and what i did for living. I was amazed. I asked why I was chosen to serve ... he said "because you're an engineer, I knew you'd read the law and systematically verify every element of the charges." He was right, I did that - because I deal with building codes daily so I'm used to the language.

[@orchidjewels4823]

I have an interesting jury story. I'm a biochemist and worked in a hospital lab for over 30 years. I ran blood alcohols, understood the reactions, drew and ran legal, medical and 2nd opinion legal blood alcohols. I testified in court about the testing and the condition of the person I drew the blood from. So, I was called for jury duty in a case that involved theft and blood alcohol. The lawyer asked a nurse all about what she knew about blood alcohol. He asked me about baking cakes. I didn't volunteer anything. The lawyer should have known that I was the expert in the matter, not the nurse. Well, we were both put on the jury and my education, experience and knowledge helped the 12 of us convict the guy. I drew and ran so many blood alcohols that I knew most of the cops in the town, the county and the local State police and I was subpoenaed regularly to testify in court. Our lab was also the only lab, other than the state lab, that was approved by the state to testify about the blood alcohol results in court. I also ran breathalyzer and drug testing. I did rape kits and was subpoenaed for that a few times. Once for rape on a 3-year-old. I was able to confirm sperm and the blood types of the accused on the child. This was before DNA became available. That was scary. I was afraid of him coming after me for helping to convict him. Thank goodness they worked out a plea bargain, so I didn't have to testify. He did go to prison, but he didn't have my name and address. I worked evenings alone, so I had a lot of experience. I always wanted to talk to that lawyer after the fact, but I was too busy with work and family. I'd think that lawyers would know that a person who works in a hospital lab draws and runs blood alcohol tests them and is called on to testify so they can validate the results and be rigorously cross-examined to try to negate the results. But, this lawyer thought I was just a housewife. Ha! I even had to answer that I'd be able to get time off from the lab to be on the jury. That lawyer later became a judge. I always voted against him as I thought he was incompetent.

[@jorgecallico9177]

I've never been on any juries in my life because I ALWAYS REFUSE TO RESPOND to written requests from the City or State to serve. In every case that I've ever heard about, the only persons who've ever been indicted for refusing to serve (on a jury) were those who first returned the paperwork that the municipal court had mailed to them and then skipped out on duty. As far as I know, no one who has merely thrown out a written request or so-called ''summons'' has even been prosecuted. Or even arrested or charged for that matter. I'm surprised that so few people understand this. Esp since I'm not a lawyer but just an ''Average Jorge'. If you simply refuse to respond to a juror's duty request there is no way that the court can actually prove that you ever received it!!! The court always gives you the benefit of the doubt. Who's to say that the letter ever made it into your mailbox? Your five year old could have tossed it. Your wife lined the birdcage with it. My own daughter used to toss out my property tax bills! This is not true if you ever get served with a subpoena. As an actual record will exist in such an event. Someone acting on behalf of the court serves you? Then you'd better damned well show up. Yet if it's just a mass-mailed summons? Dump them in the recycling bin. I guarantee that you'll never hear back from those pricks. Again, I'm literally shocked that attorneys almost never tell the public these things. And besides, the cases are almost always those typical landlord/tenant civil disputes. BORING! Some entitled, old widow who has never worked a day in her life is suing some (usually) Black tenant for leaving the apartment a wreck and skipping out on at least six months rent. Both sides are usually some bad actors. Fuck 'em man! I've got better things to do. Oh and if you ever do serve on a criminal court case? The defendant could easily turn out to be a major mobster boss or gangland punk with a short temper but with a long memory for those who threw him in the slammer. There is no ''Witness Protection Program'' for former jurors.

[@guest3015]

Thanks for the tip. Wish I knew this last month. Waste of time...

[@Theresa7Blessed]

i hope you're right because i got a summons letter last week and i haven't gone online to fill anything out yet. i even went to my doctor this week because this past summer i had gotten a summons letter in the mail. it was my second time and when i called and the courthouse the lady i spoke to because i told her i don't drive for one or that i don't have computer and... she was like people take ubers blah blah i don't have money for a uber and maybe i made the mistake by telling her that i was excused before and she was like oh well you have to serve!! and her tone stressed me out saying oh i am gonna put you down for thie date and i didn't think she meant it...but no she did tomorrow is a month till i my jury duty....and she told me i would need a doctor's excuse well i went to the doctor this week and he asked the reason why i need to be excused i told him being in that enviroment will cause em stress and give me axinety and also could cause me to have a panic attack because i don't understand any of this court bs and he said oh i can't write you an excuse cause he said they usually check your chart?? i don't know what he meant by that but he gave me this referral to go to this stress place in my state. i called them the girl i talked to messaged her supervisor and they told her they don't do doctor excuses like uh??? so i am just worried since i did google what happens if you ignore jury duty and the first thing to pop up in google is What happens if you miss jury duty? If you fail to appear or respond to a jury summons, you will be found in contempt of court. It doesn't matter, legally, whether you “missed” court, “forgot” about the court date, or just ignored it. Not showing up to a jury once summoned is a crime. so i don't know how true that is...

[@ecclesfromflublogia]

The time I was part of the jury selection pool, as an engineer, with 2 other engineers in the same pool, I took specific nte that nne of us were empaneled, and the folks that were selected for the jury included several "church ladies" complete with flower pot hats and some rather coarse working men. The case involved nothing whatsoever to do with technology. Despite your rather cogent and compelling argument to the contrary, I remain convinced that people who showed the slightest ability to actually think things through were profiled and excluded.

[@warpedweirdo]

@@TomASwift While we hope the poster will critically review their preconceived notions regarding how their level of intelligence compares to that of the elderly and blue collar workers, your response has made this less likely to occur. Your response was great if your purpose was to point out to the world that you and the poster are both jerks, not so good otherwise.

[@warpedweirdo]

@@TomASwift Thank you. I try. The comment was indeed directed at you. Your post made you look like a jerk. Is that what you intended? Do you care? Most everybody who sees your comment, including ecclesfromflublogia, will view it as an attack. Do you believe this to be the best way to convince ecclesfromflublogia of his fault? Perhaps you don't see the offensive nature of your comment. If this is the case, perhaps it is *you* who needs to "rethink how smart you really are".

[@johnschunk97]

I agree it is our Civic duty to do your time on jury. I believe the Justice system shows it's disdain for the public with the pittance it pays for service. Lower income people can hardly afford missing several days work to hang out with Lawyers and Judges making six figures or better .

[@sandyshelton5]

Just to illustrate your point about an attorney's fear of a juror having too much influence, I was on a panel for a murder trial. The prosecutor had presented a hypothetical demonstrating circumstantial evidence to the previous potential juror, then asked if he could reasonably infer unknown circumstances from the evidence provided. The other juror said he could. The prosecutor then asked for a show of hands from the pool of those who would draw the same conclusion. About 80% of the pool raised their hands. During my questioning, he presnted the same hypothetical. I told him I understood what he was attempting to demontrate but that he picked a poor example and told him why. He then asked the pool who agreed with me by a show of hands. More than half the pool raised their hands. I wasn't too surprised when I was dismissed.

[@NelloCambelli]

I once occupied seat 6 during a murder case in which a firearm was used. There were questions about use of "guns". I requested definition clarification for "shotguns" and guns with rifling -- the case also included the term "automatic". I kept my seat through individual questioning of the jurors. Alas, I was the last juror excused for "no reason" by the defendant's attorney. My supposition was the dismissal was caused by my being a Jury Foreman in a complex USSERA case against the San Diego Police Department. Fascinating what is meant by a Jury of your peers.

[@robertkesselring]

I was on a Jury once where a cop tried to charge someone for driving without a license... Problem is neither the cop nor anyone else actually saw the guy driving. Cop pulled up to a disabled vehicle on the side of the road and just arrested the guy who was there with the car... Sorry. No. You have to prove your case "beyond a reasonable doubt". What if the driver left the car and passenger there while he went to get help? That's a perfectly plausible scenario that the prosecution did not rule out so we unanimously acquitted the guy in about 20 minutes.

[@tonybusch384]

I got called 1 time (and almost got held in contempt. ) Had to show up 4 days before they finally accepted my doctor's note stating that I was unable to sit for long periods of time. (That was the reason I almost got held in contempt.) I stood up in the gallery while waiting to get called for questioning in Voir Dire. They had called 4 groups so far and I was about to scream from the pain of sitting in those stupid church pew seats they had stuck us in. I apologized to the Judge and explained I was trying to not scream from the pain I was in. I got brought into the back. Showed the judge my scars from recent surgery and my doctor note. I apologized again and said I thought it would be less disruptive to stand than start screaming and crying. I got dismissed and a note from her telling the Jury people to put me on the medically exempt list.

[@chuckpatten7855]

I responded to the questions asked that I did not believe that the court could provide fair and equitable justice after the Judge in a previous trial that I was a juror on had blatantly tried to cause a guilty verdict by withholding her personal involvement in the case as well as withholding evidence that would exonerate the defendant. We acquitted the defendant despite her behavior but it was clear that she was running a railroad without oversight and that the same behavior could be rampant within the courts. Dismissed and never called back for jury duty for 10 plus years...

[@DovidM]

I was on a jury for a criminal trial in which it became clear that the judge did not want a conviction (the case involved a felon flagrantly violating his probation), and kept reminding the jury that he would decide the sentencing even if we voted to convict. While that experience didn’t make me conclude that every judge is like that, it certainly has prepared me to look out for similar judges in the future.

[@craigstephen3216]

Been called up three times and never selected. I am of the opinion that the prosecutor wants jurors dumb enough to convince the defendant is guilty. The defence wants jurors dumb enough to convince the defendant is innocent.

[@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist]

You know what they say, the smart people are the ones that get out of jury duty. Problem is, do you want someone that wasnt smart enough to get out of jury duty? XD Granted there are a few people that do actually enjoy it, bless their hearts.

[@levelup1279]

@@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist My goal is to get on jury duty at least once in my life, the general public needs to know about jury nullification. It is the peoples last line of defense against stupid laws. I'm of the belief that if there is no victim there can be no crime. Also laws to protect the state against the people are wrong

[@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist]

@@levelup1279 I do agree with you on what you are saying. You can volunteer for Jury duty couldnt you?

[@levelup1279]

@@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist How do you volunteer, I thought you just randomly get picked? I'm just hoping i get a letter in the mail someday requesting my presence at the court. I'm going to act dumb & say stuff like "well if they broke they law they need to pay the price" I want to be be the ideal juror in the prosecutors eyes.

[@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist]

@@levelup1279 Though getting a drivers license, registering to vote, and paying property taxes I believe are steps you can take to increase your chances of getting picked. I registered to vote a couple years ago, got a jury notice thing like a few months later. It annoyed me a bit when I found out thats where they select a pool of people from. XD as I did regret registering shortly after.

[@wadehampton1534]

Steve, I'm an electrical engineer, and I found your explanation to be spot on, as to why an engineer wouldn't be a good fit on some juries. I've never been selected for a jury, I've always been dismissed during the first round of interviews. Thanks for making very informative and helpful videos, I've been enjoying them very much.

[@dancross4444]

the people of Walmart are all potential jurors........

[@DavidPennybaker]

One side always knows they have a poor case, and they don't want anybody who can think critically. Period. Yes, I'm biased. To the truth. And I'm an engineer. :D

[@TeddyB1957]

I was a programmer analyst for years and I always heard that I would never get on a jury because lawyers don't want my type, they want people they can manipulate on an emotional level.

[@benkrom2737]

I got summoned and picked for the ability to be a juror. When questioned I answered honestly and when asked if there was anything that would hinder my ability to be a juror I answered that I was old, fat, and in denial for bifocals if not tri-focals and had hair growing out of places I had no business growing hair from ! The whole court roared in laughter including the Judge. I was told to wait in jury room till they voted yes or no for selection. I thought I'd be outta there in no time ! Wrong, I was the 1st pick in 2 weeks of jury picking. Was on jury for about a month and would you believe I got another notice 3yrs and 1 day from last summons ! I handed in paperwork at window the day of selecting and this time I put down my nationality as Gringo. I had noticed that they were putting paperwork in one of two places except for mine, they all looked at it and put it in a pile up on a shelf . I wasn't picked and was never summoned again, that was 20 years ago.

[@Enjoymentboy]

About 8 years ago I got a notice to appear for jury duty. While waiting for them to take our info (I'd only been there for about 15 minutes) I saw a few people who looked somewhat "lawyerish" and when they were within earshot of me I turned to the guy beside me and said that I can't understand why they are wasting our time with this nonsense. Innocent people don't go to court so the guy is obviously guilty. About 20 minutes later I was told I wouldn't be needed and I was free to leave. haven't been called back for jury duty again.

[@wilcalint]

ABSOLUTELY!!! It's happened to me three times for the three times I have been in the group of people to serve on a Jury. Two of things they always ask is #1 What is your education and I answer MIT, Computer Engineering, 1968; #2 What is your job/career and I answer I work as a Computer Engineer for XYZ Corporation. In two of those jury groups I was part of once the Attorney found out I was a Computer Engineer ( Sees things in Black and White and make that decision quickly and unwavering ) I was immediately dismissed. In the third case after I had answered what was my background it was the Judge who booted me. The case involved a piece of construction equipment that had caused harm and the judge asked me if I had any preconceived ideas about that. I responded that I thought the equipment was dangerous. BOOTED!!!!!

[@wilcalint]

@@TomASwift We, Engineers, tend to be biased in our ways and tend not to be very flexible in our beliefs. And Steve's fine video really focuses on that. IMO a machine that looks like it can, and did, cause harm can probably cause harm. And no Attorney is going to change my opinion on that.

[@chemech]

@@wilcalint In that case, I wonder why the case made it to trial... usually, when the situation is obvious negligence or inadequate design, the defendant settles before things get that far. On the other hand, take your garden variety carpenter's circular saw or chain saw. The tools are obvious dangerous if not used correctly, so there are requirements to provide adequate operating instructions such that a person of normal intelligence and judgement can operate them without injury - and the expectation that such a person will *follow* those procedures...

[@wilcalint]

@@chemech In the case of the machine that I said was dangerous it was part of a contractors construction equipment for an expensive apartment complex still in the framing stage. It, obviously, caused a fire that burned the whole thing to the ground causing millions of $$$$ in damages. IMO unwavering opinion it was dangerous. There must of been a dozen attorneys on both sides of the room. I think they all freaked when I said it was a dangerous tool.

[@chemech]

@@wilcalint When it's that obvious, the defendant's insurance company's lawyers usually cut their losses and settle... maybe your observation got their attention and prompted them to settle the case... in a sane world anyway, one can hope...

[@coastalguy]

I have never been selected to sit as a juror. The last time I was called to Jury Duty the Judge asked me if I knew anyone in the courtroom. My answer, Well your honor, you may recall I was your campaign manager 6 years ago when you were elected. As for the public defender, I first met her when she appeared before me during negotiations of her retirement benefits. Both the deputy DA and the defendant appeared before me on the civil case arising from this incident. I continued the civil hearing pending the outcome of this criminal proceeding. Just about the only person, I don’t know is the Court Reporter. But I wouldn’t mind meeting her. I was let go.

[@daledowning1595]

I've was in the military for 10 years +. After several years of never getting a summons for jury duty since being discharged; I called the jury office and asked if I could volunteer for jury duty. At first, the jury office thought it was a prank; I was 100% serious. So far I've volunteered once and finally summoned but never picked. In the end. Irregardless of never being picked people think I'm crazier the a craphouse rat for volunteering and wanting to serve for jury duty. In my eyes jury duty should be seen as privilege to serve because you are first handedly participating in the proper implementation of the Constitution of the United States. So, is there a screw loose in the shooter; or do I see things differently than others. Your opinion Steve

[@smith899]

I completely agree!!! It is a privilege and a duty!!! I would gladly do it again!

[@dansanger5340]

I think the jury system is fatally flawed when it comes to highly technical cases. For example, in some cases we're essentially asking jurors to determine if a product caused cancer in a particular individual. That's difficult for an experienced expert to determine, but people with no experience and no expertise are deciding. Of course, to help the jury, expert witnesses are brought in and the jury is supposed to determine their credibility. The first problem is the expert witnesses are usually selected and paid for by one side or the other, so they are at least cherrypicked, and even worse have a monetary incentive to shade their testimony to favor the side that is paying them. The other problem is that juries, who have no domain knowledge, are not equipped to reliably evaluate the expert testimony. At the very least, expert witnesses should be selected at the direction of the court by one of the recognized, mainstream professional associations in the field (for example, American Medical Association). Even better would be to have a jury of experts to evaluate the expert testimony.

[@chemech]

I've done some consulting as an expert witness on certain topics where I more often do the consulting as the design engineer. Such cases where product liability or inappropriate selection very rarely go to trial, as even with the opposing counsels selecting their own experts, it usually becomes rather clear rather quickly that one side has the facts backing them up. As a taxpayer, I'm happier to not need to foot the bill for the expert witness fees. However, with the more subtly nuanced cases, which do need to go to trial, I have no problem with the court retaining independent experts to advise the court, and since one is entitle to a jury of one's peers in the US, I can see where a panel of suitably proficient people not immediately involved in the topic at hand could be a jury.

[@Lilitha11]

I can see that but I went to jury selection one time and they dismissed everyone who didn't have children, because the case involved a child. That really feels like they were trying to manipulate the jury so they can play on people's emotions if they have children.

[@DovidM]

A DA told me that defense attorneys prefer people with kids on criminal cases because they will feel sympathy for the accused. It makes me think that lawyers don’t really know what they’re doing.

[@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist]

If I could get away with it, I’d have walked out, kids or not.

[@postholedigger8726]

My experience on jury selection was slightly different. In my case both attorneys were looking for mush brains who could be manipulated during the trial. During jury selection the way the questions were answered seemed to be more important than the actual questions. People who answered, "YES, ABOUSETLY. I WILL BE COMPLETELY FAIR AND IMPARTIAL AND BASE MY JURY VOTE ONLY ON THE FACTS OF THIS TRIAL" , were excused. People who answered, "YEA, MAYBE, I GUESS SO, I DON'T REALLY KNOW", were selected. After I was excused I realized that the system was all about winning and not about justice. david

[@SillyPutty3700]

I was called for Jury duty about 10 years ago. After all of the basic questions the Judge asked if any of us had potential conflicts of interest. I put up my hand, judge says "what is your conflict"? I told them my son had just been arrested 2 weeks earlier (2 felonies and a misdemeanor) that he was the judge and the prosecutor was the prosecutor in my son's case. There was a little snicker in the court room and the judge asked me if I thought I could overlook that just rely on the facts as presented. I told him yes and then I said "most of the charges were BS anyways" (felonies). He laughed, a lot of laughter in the court room. I ended up as the Jury foreman and we convicted the guy for "escape" About 3-4 weeks later all of my sons charges were dropped. They had no case on the felonies and i guess they just weren't willing to prosecute someone with no record for a pot pipe that they only found because of bogus felony charges made up by a convicted date rapist. When I raised my hand I thought for sure I was going home right then and when the judge asked me if I could be fair I assumed the prosecutor was going to want me gone because I had shown disdain for the police in my comment. Hell no I spent the rest of the day there going through the trial and convicting the guy.

[@dieselscience]

There was a case in UK of a judge called for jury duty _for the case he was presiding over_ and was told he could only be excused by the judge of that case.

[@somebodyelse6673]

Did he write himself a note?

[@dieselscience]

@@somebodyelse6673 I think he got a pass.

[@karrenwebb3341]

Thanks! I was a bit offended why I was not chosen for a trial, since I had knowledge of the defendants profession. Now I understand why.

[@Genesh12]

I know a woman who works as a proof reader for a company that published law books. Her husband wrote about the law for a newspaper. This woman wanted to serve on a jury. When the prosecutor found out what she did for a living and who her husband(well known through out the state) was, she was told she didn't have to serve on the jury.

[@geraldyungling3334]

I was called for jury duty 25 years ago while I was in college. I believe it was a medical malpractice suit against an eye doctor, but I could be totally wrong on that. Anyway, I can't remember which attorney questioned me, but it went something like this:: "Are you employed?" No, I'm a college student. "What's your major?" Philosophy. "Are your parents employed?" Yes. "What do they do?" My father is a lawyer. "You're dismissed."

[@Ridgeroader]

My Dad was a District Court judge for over 20 years, local County Attorney for about 25 years. His favorite excuse from jury duty was from a nice lady. The letter from her employer was passed to my Dad and said she was an extremely valuable employee and an extended absence would create a hardship on the business. Dad asked the lady if she wanted to be considered for jury duty and she said yes. Then he asked her, "What job do you do? She said, "I'm a cook at the local high school." Dad was not happy.

[@jimk8520]

The one time i was called for jury duty I flat told the judge that I don’t believe justice is ever really served in a court room. I was dismissed quickly and haven’t been called since! 😂

[@jimk8520]

Back story - the judge in question had been elected by default several times as he was the only name on the ballot for that district. That’s what I pointed out as my reason for no justice in that room.

[@justinclark9258]

I get this is an old video but, this is why I watch this channel. When it started all I wanted to do was debate the the issue on the side of letting the engineer on the jury. By the 6 min mark all I could think was, "great explanation".

[@Snarkbar]

Nah, that doesn't hold water. If the expert in the room is convinced that one side or the other is correct, then his/her opinion really should hold more weight. Both sides in the case are obviously bringing in biased experts.

[@Georgefforbes54]

Excellent explanation. I actually enjoyed serving on a jury.

[@radon360]

Putting a used car salesman was a real shrewd move on your part. If he was indeed a good guy, he probably acted in a way you described. If he wasn't, it still didn't matter, as regardless of his character, it was an opportunity to make life a little more difficult for what could easily be perceived as his competition.

[@petes7401]

Great story. The funny part is that the other 5 jurors likely took the advice of the used car salesmen based of his expertise. It’s the same situation as the engineer situation. Too funny.

[@craighoyer6543]

I have told jury selection judges I will assume a jury nullification type stance, that I am opposed to certain acts that do harm to no others, "victimless," being subject to criminal sanctions, like drug sales or prostitution, and that I have thought deeply about it and would probably not change this opinion. I have never been seated. I would be glad to accept jury duty, but I would not enforce immoral laws. I recently accepted a driving citation because the cop was in a place to notice, and I thought I was driving safely but couldn't be sure. For me, seated on a jury, to believe a police officer isn't lying for personal reasons would require deep evidence and knowing their entire work record, admissions against interest, etc; they have their own bias.

[@NorthcoastPatty]

I believe almost all police officers serve to the best of their ability. I have had two incidences where I was pulled over because they believed I had done wrong. I was let go without a ticket because I knew I had not. I explained in full detail what happened, and they believed the truth over what they had thought happened. Yes I am old enough to have encountered unscrupulous officers. They are rare.

[@craighoyer6543]

@@NorthcoastPatty This is true and good. Authoritarians are not always authoritarian in every aspect of their lives. In fact, cops were the most consistent volunteers when I was a cadet in Civil Air Patrol. I have often found them helpful and good. I would nominate several for great people! Of course I am a white male. I have heard some say and do vile and wretched things too.It is not that I don't trust just police; I do not trust anyone in a forensic sense. I need proof anyone is not lying. Authoritarians are spawned by authority. Authoritarian followers have the fear I lack. Fear drives the fearful crazy.

[@stevengrimm8707]

I was called for jury duty and during the attorney questioning of people, it was obvious it was a first degree murder trial where someone was stabbed to death. Knowing it was a trial that would probably go on for days/weeks, I wanted off. When it was my turn, the attorney asked me if I felt someone has a right to defend themselves. I replied everyone does have the right to self defense and stabbing someone once or twice to subdue the attacker is fine, but seven times or more might be excessive. The attorney replied "Thanks for coming today, you may leave".

[@rogerlibby14613]

I always went for jury selection, I got a day off from work with pay! In 29 years I only had to answer questions twice. Odd, I always "knew" those people so I never got to sit in a safe court room doing my civic duty. Steve Lehto is right on this topic, anytime you know anything you already know too much.

[@Christopher_Gibbons]

The only reason why having someone in the jury who had too much understing of the facts having too much voice in the jury, might be considered a problem is if you think the facts are against you.

[@shdyo]

And if you do not understand the facts of which you are to base your decision on, you have no business deciding what should happen to peoples lives.... What a pathetic fucking system. The court should be about finding the truth, not spinning tales of fiction to convince sheep otherwise...

[@michaelfoye1135]

It was more than twenty years ago , they asked me if I would turn in a guilty verdict even if I thought the law was immoral. I replied that no I would not, because that is precisely what jury nullification is for. They couldn't get me out of the courthouse fast enough. Its a sad statement on the state of our legal system, that the judicial branch covets for itself those powers specifically intended to be exercised by the People. I haven't received another summons for jury duty since.

[@levelup1279]

Why would you say that??? The world needs informed jurors who know about nullification

[@Foolish188]

Where would America be if William Penn's jury in England hadn't invented jury nullification, under threat of going to jail if they didn't convict him.

[@michaelfoye1135]

@@levelup1279 I had mistakenly believed that I was dealing with honorable men.

[@michaelfoye1135]

@@levelup1279 Don't worry. Next time I'll be handing out fact sheets about the process of jury nullification to the rest of the jury pool. Frankly I just might print some up and make a trip down to the courthouse and do it anyways.

[@michaelfoye1135]

@@Foolish188 Its terrible that we have allowed that to pass from the common memory. I bet that less than five percent of Americans have even heard the name of William Penn. Outside of Pennsylvania I'd reckon its even fewer.

[@richardross7219]

Excellent point. I am a retired civil engineer. Three times I was called for jury duty and not picked. What I noticed, was that most of the people picked were unemployed. At least, it gave them some income. Thanks for the video. I hated the incompetent civil engineers and filed a complaint against the license of one of them. There was fireworks then but I was used to it from the Army. Good Luck, Rick

[@rtwice93555]

Thank you for your explanation. I sent you an email awhile back asking why I am summoned for jury duty in the first place. I realize you get a ton of emails and may select the most relevant ones to address. Although I think the jury system is one of our greatest constitutional rights, the selection process needs some work. In California, we are sent a summons in the mail that basically states "You WILL show up to court on this date, or else!" It's somewhat threatening for a person who has done nothing wrong. And it's nearly impossible to get excused from jury duty. Now, it's widely known if a person ignores a jury summons, nothing happens. I've never heard of anyone in California being arrested for ignoring their jury summons. But I can assure you that I would be the one the state decides to make an example of. I've often wondered why the state doesn't have a pool of jury volunteers to draw from. Their are several people I know who enjoy jury services. They love the drama a court room offers and would do it every day if they could.

[@jacklucas7265]

When I lived in California, in the San Fernando Valley, I was called to jury duty. I am self employed and didn't want to spend time in jury duty as it would have cost me a lot of lost money. I called the clerk's office and told them that if they brought in some Mexican with tattoos he was guilty ipso facto. The clerk excused me and between 1976 and 2002 when I left California I was never called again.

[@kendebusk2540]

I've been called for jury duty three times. First time was a civil contract enforcement involving a percentage of the profits. As it happens, I had just received a degree in accounting, but I was surprised when both sides let me on the panel. It took about 30 minutes for me to convince the other five that the proper way to read the financial statements led to 100% win for the "good" side, as we all agreed the other side was shady at best. Second time, murder trial, state dismissed me. Third time, sexual touching of a minor, defense dismissed me. After the third time, on the way out to sign the travel pay voucher, I asked the clerk (who was present during questioning) why I was dismissed and she told me that since I had been sitting there reading on a tablet until called to the stand, they assumed I was too smart (her words) to judge properly. I would be in favor of professional jury panels.

[@jessicasnaplesfl7474]

I'd prefer jurors with the strongest backgrounds in the principals being discussed. Many lawyers distort the truth in order to sway jurors. Ignorant jurors are easily swayed by such lawyers who are often the most entertaining. Wasn't the original intent of trials to get to the truth? If so, why eliminate jurors who are UNLIKELY to be misled by distorted facts? Trials are a competition between two attorneys who have personal interests in the outcome, either in reputation or in payment when a lawsuit is for damages. How does our present legal system represent a search for the truth? Why not select ATTORNEYS from a "lawyer pool" as well as the jurors? If a defendant is represented by legal aid, shouldn't the plaintiff also be represented by a legal aid attorney? Attorney selection and jury selection means the side with the most money to spend is favored to win.

[@mixter7x7]

the key to your entire explanation comes at 2:30 " they lay it out in absolutely plain english that a 7th grader or 6th grader could understand " most people do not have 6th or 7th grade english comprehension / understanding.

[@Absaalookemensch]

I'm a Trauma/Life-Flight/ICU nurse. I've been dropped like a hot potato in jury selection for a DUI case. But I was selected in a drug trafficking case.

[@MelvinTheGrate]

As it was explained to me, neither side want's to take a chance on a "Jury of 12" (or 6) becoming effectively a "Jury of 1" because of one juror with expertise in the field.

[@somebodyelse6673]

What they don't want is anyone listening to an expert not on their payroll.

[@bdfoxfire]

Am an engineer - BSEE. Went hiking in the mountains in California with a Federal prosecutor once. We had some interesting conversations over a range of topics. At some point he told me he never wants engineers on the jury as the tend to question and evaluate every fact presented . My answer to him isnt that what jurists are suppose to do.

[@johngori6518]

The questions that usually got me excluded from Jury selection in California (before I escaped): "Did you ever serve in the military?" (Yes almost always=exclusion), or (if not excluded by question 1) "While in the military did you ever serve on a court-martial board (yes=exclusion). Even if no attorney asked those, the last question (by the judge) always got me thrown out in California (on the upside the judge usually gave me a note for the clerk to void the rest of my jury duty and send me home) was some flavor of: "If selected for this jury do you swear to cast your vote in accordance with the law as explained in my instructions to the jury?" My response is that I would decide based solely on the facts in evidence and my assessment of justice in those circumstances. That's a 100% guarantee of exclusion from jury duty in CA. In other words the judge doesn't get to tell me to vote for an unjust outcome by writing very narrow jury instructions, nor will I vote to ruin someone's life by convicting based on an unjust or unreasonable law. To me that is why we were given the right to trial by jury. If the jury is just a rubber stamp for the judge, then the right to trial by jury is no longer of any value. That philosophy makes attorneys and judges run in terror to their "Jury Nullification Safe Space." Basically, in California to get on a jury you have to either lie during jury selection, or be someone who doesn't mind the idea of unjustly convicting or (in civil actions) unjustly assessing a judgment against a defendant. Sad, but then someone I know in CA just sent me a photo of a jury duty summons that was mailed to his house...the name on it was his pet cat "El Gato Grey". When he called the court they had a form for excusing house pets from jury duty that he could fill out. Apparently there are so many house pets on the voter rolls in California that it is not uncommon for jury duty summonses (taken from voter rolls) to be sent to pets. Being a trouble-maker I suggested that he show up at the courthouse with his cat and the summons and insist that his cat be added to the jury pool, then have his cat drop off his filled out paper ballot, then sit back and watch the hilarity ensue as the system tried to deal with it all. Being a spoil-sport he just filled out the form and forgot about it. BTW, when he called the registrar of voters there is apparently no procedure (or at least no practical procedure) in CA to remove your house pet from the voter rolls.

[@warriormanmaxx8991]

@ John Gori - are you as long winded in daily life as on KZbin Comments?!?

[@somebodyelse6673]

@@warriormanmaxx8991 - I wouldn't call it long winded, as it was both informative and entertaining.

[@stevecooper2873]

Wow... just, wow.

[@EricCamachat]

Our pastor said each time he said he is pastor they will say you can go home now. They want unbiased but not compassion.

[@jamestone265]

I get called but thrown off every Jury when I'm in the box... Cowboy shirt, boots, big belt buckle, blond hair, and an old white guy in a gang court territory...... My way

[@davidmuth4571]

I've appeared for jury duty 5 times, never selected. "do you know any police officers on a social basis"? Yes!

[@drafter16_4freedom]

First of all, check what ever rules the judge gives you with the Constitution and Bill of Eights. Doesnt matter what state your in, Jurors have much more power than the judge grants or even knows about. Look it up people....

[@boataxe4605]

And always proofread!

[@swampbilly7387]

You think!

[@jeremy74pow]

Last time I got selected for jury duty I was in the middle of two big jobs and needed to get paid so I didn't have time for dumb shit. Yeah they give that great pep talk about your civic duty and all, great. So the case was an elderly man ran over a kid on a motorcycle. Welcome to Florida. I told the judge I was a truck driver and elderly people and motorcycles are nothing but a nusiecne on the the road so they're both at fault as far as I'm concerned. Myself and another man who was also a truck driver were dismissed.

[@shawbros]

nuisance

[@BobBuilder-om4rd]

I didn't get selected because I asked about Jury Nullification. I was immediately dismissed and never contacted again for jury duty

[@studentofsmith]

Yep, that will do it.

[@JohnnyAGraves]

Happy Days had an episode where Fonze was a juror and it came down to his expertise of motorcycles and was able to find the defendant not guilty of stealing a purse because the throttle was on the left and not on the right.

[@tomfoolery333]

Grand Mark IV.

[@scotcoon1186]

Then he asks the guy where he bought it, "I stole it"

[@ericbosken3114]

When I was called for jury duty in a workman's comp style case, I seemed likely to be selected since I was an enterprise software consultant at the time... Until they learned that my job involved working closely with C-level executives in hr departments... The other thing I noticed was that the likelihood of being seated on the jury appeared to be inversely proportional to the amount of talking one did during voir dire. One guy who was selected asked, "Why did they pick me? I didn't even say anything!" Exactly.

[@knghtbrd]

I wasn't picked because I'm blind. I know that because they'd already dismissed others without cause and now had to have a reason. "A blind person cannot observe whether or not a person seems to be lying." Maybe. But we can determine when a lawyer and a judge are idiots.

[@studentofsmith]

You can also listen to someone's tone of voice, their choice of words, whether they hesitate before answering... there are a lot of ways we instinctively pick up on how honest someone is being and they're not all visual.

[@biscuitninja]

Funny... 26 year engineer here. 5 years as an accident reconstruction analyst. Have yet to be chosen for anything.

[@ccpperrett7522]

Thank you, Steve, for explaining this so well. I learned something today.❤Great jury story. ❤My niece bought a known "lemon" car from one of those few used car dealers. The dealer laughed when my sister said she was going to fight them in court when they refused to take back the car and return my niece's money. My niece won her case and received her money, and my sister gave the car dealer a lemon as a parting gift.

[@EchoTangoSuitcase]

The problem with juries is that you end up being judged by 12 people who weren't smart enough to figure out how to get out of jury duty.

[@tomtransport]

See my comment Eric.

[@vovin8132]

This is the correct answer.

[@merona1546]

False. It is extremely easy to get out of jury duty, you certainly don't need to be smart to figure it out. And believe it or not there are people out there who actually don't mind serving if they are needed. We are talking about a someone's freedom here and there are many people who understand the gravity of it and are willing to take on that responsibility.

[@EchoTangoSuitcase]

@@merona1546 - Do you frequently miss the point of a conversation, or were you just feeling inspired today?

[@merona1546]

@@EchoTangoSuitcase I'm always inspired to speak my mind against a statement I completely disagree with. If you think I've missed the point of your comment somehow, feel free to explain.

[@TacDyne]

Reasons why I was not chosen for jury duty even though I was called 8 times in 10 years, which is illegal. 1. I have an IQ above my shoe size. 2. I am an informed individual. 3. I believe criminals should be punished. 4. I don't look right. 5. I research many subjects on my own and am not swayed by status quo narrative.

[@syfyrytr1652]

I quoted the constitution,,, dismissed. "Heck, they wouldn't have arrested him if he didn't do it." How to stay off jury.

[@johngori9477]

I KNOW why I am never selected since it happens after one of these three answers to their questions: 1. Yes, I am a veteran 2. Yes, While in the service I served on two court-martial panels 3. I believe that jurors should impartially weight he evidence presented and then vote for a just outcome I can therefore reasonably conclude that our legal system doesn't want jurors that are veterans, or veterans who served on court-martials, or who are interested in a just outcome. While #1 & 2 are just an insult to veterans, #3 is clearly an indictment of the legal system. At least it has been over five years since they called me to waste my time only to be dismissed.

[@anitaanderson2871]

Also, social workers seem to be excused from jury duty - has happened to me (I am a LMSW), excused after I told them my occupation.

[@donna30044]

As a career LEO (northern Georgia), I've only been included in one jury pool and even was called to voir dire, but was dismissed. This was just last year and I've been retired since 2000. I'm also an atheist and irritated the judge when I refused the oath given because it used the word "swear" (religious connotation) ended with ". . . so help you God."

[@chemech]

In the Constitution, the language: "by oath or affirmation" covers this... in addition to atheists, there are some religious groups who refuse to swear an oath.

[@epickett63]

I hadn't even considered the dichotomy between being an atheist and swearing to that oath. I've never been selected(never gets far enough into the jury pool), but I'd think it would be an interesting process. If Chemech is correct, I could still respond in the positive to "Do you affirm or swear..."

[@larrytomlinson2606]

I am an engineer, I was bumped from a jury pool with never having a single question asked of me. I was taking notes. It was a personal injury case for someone that fell in a K Mart store.

[@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist]

I cant ever understand falling cases. Its rarely a stores fault unless they just had poorly built shelves that allowed items to topple onto a person.

[@danieldole9423]

I have been called up to jury duty and been questioned by the lawyers twice. Both cases were about narcotics. In both cases the last question I was asked is "What is your profession?" I answered I am an analytical chemist, and was immediately dismissed. Never found out what was wrong about having a chemist in a jury for a narcotics case.

[@kfstreich4787]

My father is an engineer and I have friends who are engineers, they are very smart and do a great job of drawing pictures writing out number theory. Then they go ahead and overthink. It's impossible to have a technical conversation, often bringing in details from their own field and their overconfidence that due to their expertise in their own field leads them to think they are experts in all fields, overriding folks and demanding they are listened to. Try having an electrical engineer tell a contractor how to build a house.

[@JoeKaye-hn5dt]

All the engineers I know got their engine degree and then got into Osteopathic school and became orthopedic surgeons. They were whizzes on the MCAT.

[@SillyPutty3700]

Where there is an engineer there is train wreck not far behind. I am an electrical contractor and I have had my fair share of engineer BS but I have to admit most of them are pretty sharp. Some of them are arrogant as all hell though and can't stand when someone (lowly electrician) finds their screw-up.

[@WorBlux]

@@SillyPutty3700 My boss, as a subcontractor recently found a million+ dollar mistake caused by a incorrectly transposed GPS coordinate. Apparently, not a fun situation.

[@cashstore1]

I was not picked for jury duty after I was asked what I did for a living (a civil case). The Plaintiff was closely in the same business I was in. I was struck from the jury pool as we were both contractors. I was expecting that to happen. I thought it was a poor decision, as I don't like shoddy contractors, nor do I like customers that don't pay their bills. I would have been fair.

[@Mike1614YT]

I don't want to be selected. I am self-employed and cannot afford to spend days sitting on a jury- there are plenty of people who can do this and want to do this, so use those people. I did sit on a jury about 5 years ago, the trial was two days, and I was the jury foreman, so there is that.

[@Jared00g]

Without knowing what the case was about,I was asked my opinion on capitol punishment.I stated,honestly,that I thought they should bring back public execution.The judge made a very sharp comment about "giving flippant answers" to the attorneys questions.I told him I was serious.The defense attorney,trying to be a smart a$$,said,"I suppose you think public flogging for lesser offences would be ok also?" I told him I thought he had a wonderful idea,and imagine how it would cut down on jail overcrowding! I was dismissed,and have never been called for jury duty since.

[@bobpeters61]

I remember once when considered for Jury duty on a drug-related case, the guy next to me got a follow-up question to something that would have made him seem suspicious if he hadn't admitted to being a recovering addict. All seemed well from there. I was fully expecting the prosecutor to reject him. Instead it was the defense attorney who rejected him.

[@slashrjl]

I'm an engineer, I was on a federal jury several years ago. I was proud to do my civic duty. It bugs the heck out of me that people joke about getting out of jury duty. (12 Angry men is one of my favorite movies, and I'm an immigrant). Several of the other jurors had Ph.D., and another of them was married to an attorney and some of their children (and I think grandchildren) were attorneys, but she was a retired schoolteacher.

[@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist]

Not everyone wants jury duty, I cant blame people that do not want to do it. I am glad that there are people that do want to do it as well, we need people like this, but I’m not one of them.

[@CrimFerret]

I see your point and it makes sense in that context. On the other hand, there have been cases recently where juries have had to make determinations of fact about things that likely nobody on the jury had the background to be able to do well and have done so in ways that go against any actual science involved. Monsanto, Johnson & Johnson, etc. You can only dumb things down so far before they become flat out inaccurate portrayals of the fact.

[@stevelehto]

I assume you did not actually watch the trials but simply saw reports of them on the news? Or heard them described on talk radio? You cannot have a case where it goes "against actual science" and win.

[@Genehawks1]

I served on a federal jury once. I learned this: if your trying to get out of it they'll keep you. I tried to show my bias and they still made me serve.

[@caborico0677]

Steve, I read sometime ago on a general interest website which belonged to a lawyer that during the voir dire process, he had been advised to ask potential jurors if they had a bumper sticker on their car. If yes, then to dismiss them. A buddy of mine who is a Pepperdine grad (not currently active in the bar) said an attorney does not want strongly opinionated jurors but did not explain that one juror could create an imbalance in the jury decision process. Your video explains why the selection process seeks neutral jurors. The reasoning seems obvious. Now I get it. Fascinating legal stuff!

[@PhillipHebert]

I'm an Engineer and I got picked to be on a jury specifically because I am an Engineer. They even wanted me to be the foreman, but I declined. They really wanted me to be on the jury as my wife was nearly due with my youngest child at the time, so they made accommodations for me.

[@dbadaddy7386]

I was picked once but didn't serve because the case was dismissed. Since then, I've built a business preparing legal documents, and I helped my father with his legal work and I've also been involved in my own foreclosures (I hold some mortgages). The local court is well aware that I am informed, intelligent, and experienced. I'll ask too many questions and investigate too many nuances to be on a jury. Also, I occasionally make baked goods for the folks in the courthouse so I'm probably biased. Seriously, it's amazing how smooth the court works for the occasional brownie.

[@gettingpolitical]

I live in Ca, I have been summoned for jury duty and after filling out the jury application I was not only removed from not only that jury summons but from any future jury summons for simply putting in the applicable space "if put on a jury I would vote not guilty regardless of the evidence presented unless the defendant was a gov official or law enforcement officer then my vote would be guilty regardless of the evidence. For my personal bias I would not be a fair and unbiased juror". I am well familiar with how the criminal justice system works, the jury is never shown the full picture and only presented with hand picked evidence from the prosecution and if you can't afford an attorney your stuck with an attorney who throws your case away. I have no desire to partake in any system built to intentionally punish innocent people.