Perry Mason, Arnie Becker, Grace Van Owen, Matlock, I loathe them all

[Big Don]

I've been on jury duty since last Thursday.
This sucks so very very bad.
I watched all those shows, LA Law, Law&Order, Matlock, etc. Where are the spacious courtrooms, and why are we in this closet? Where are the exciting courtroom drama?
I'm about ready to send hate mail to Corbin Bernsen. Oh look, he's on facebook... hmmm...

 

[Big Don]

So this guy, Vedgren Jones, was staying at the local homeless shelter. He met this 71 yr old guy named Byrn who, although he was also staying at the shelter got a little over a thousand dollars a month.
Jones went with Byrn to the bank, then stayed in his motel room for several days before beating Byrn upside the head with a 32oz beer bottle.
IIRC, 10 witnesses total, the most boring questions in human history.
We convicted him of Robbery 2 and Murder 1, in that the beating during the robbery caused the death of Byrn and under the Felony Murder Rule, i.e., that is, in the course of the robbery, Byrn died and therefore his death is legally Murder in the first degree.
The prosecution questioned the coroner, who ruled the cause of death was repeated blunt force trauma to the head. The prosecution also questioned a number of people who had seen the two together.
According to the defendant, Byrn was paying him to let Byrn perform (family site) "acts" on Jones, at some point he began asking for Jones to do likewise, hit Jones on the head and Jones flipped and beat him down, but, left him alive, and took his money.
Jones described himself on the stand as a "Hustler", had a $ tattooed on his hand and his story had many many inconsistencies, including that he was not homeless, although he was living at homeless shelter. Jones also testified that he didn't know where the pillow case that the bottle was in came from. In pictures admitted into evidence, we could see there were two pillows on what Jones had identified as the victim's bed, and two on Jones' bed, one, with no pillowcase...
The judge was nice enough, the prosecutor did a good job. The defense attorney had a guilty client.

 

[Sukerkin]

Are you not supposed to keep the details of the cases confidential, Don?

 

[Big Don]

Are you not supposed to keep the details of the cases confidential, Don?

Only while case is ongoing. The judge very clearly told us we could say whatever we liked to whoever we liked.

 

[jks9199]

Are you not supposed to keep the details of the cases confidential, Don?

Generally, not after the deliberations are complete, and the verdict turned in. In fact, the case is generally public record, and were Don to tell us what court, we could obtain the transcripts.

 

[Big Don]

Generally, not after the deliberations are complete, and the verdict turned in. In fact, the case is generally public record, and were Don to tell us what court, we could obtain the transcripts.

If you need something to help you sleep, I'd be happy to.

 

[Sukerkin]

Ah, I see - makes sense I do agree :nods:

I have to say that when I did jury service I found it both fascinating and stressful - happily most of my fellow jurors shared my serious approach to proceedings and were able to bring into line the couple that did not give due weight to the fact that the decisions they made had real consequences.

 

[Big Don]

The questioning of the various witnesses was mind-numbingly boring. The defense stipulated to the cause of death, and that the defendant caused the death and we still had to sit through 40 minutes of finger print analysis questions.

 

[Sukerkin]

That's nothing - we had five days of forensic and photographic evidence only to have one of the witnesses 'fess up to lying and the whole case collapse :lol:. That was in a case that was expected to last for months and I was foreman for that one so I had to stand up and formally enter a Not Guilty verdict for umpteen counts.

 

[Sukerkin]

The worst one of the three I sat on tho' was one where I sure as heck that the fellow was guilty but there was not evidence whatsoever of it. Given what the case was I'd've happily put him to the sword myself but the only verdict we could reach was Not Guilty. On that one I would have loved to be able to argue for a Not Proven like you can in a Scottish court - that essentially puts on record that we think you did it but there is nothing objective to support that conclusion.

 

[Big Don]

OK, you may have been screwed worse than I, however, that doesn't change the fact I was subjected to prolonged boredom for a week.

 

[Big Don]

Yesterday morning, during closing arguments, there was a Mock Trial class from one of the nearby high schools. They abruptly left about 30 minutes in. I'm guessing mass boredom...

 

[Sukerkin]

:chuckles: Aye, exposition can be tedious I do agree but, for me, the responsibility of the job weighed heavily on my mind and that helped keep me focussed through it all. I'd gladly do it again too, for, to me at least, trial by a jury of your peers is the fundamental plank of a justice system in a democratic and free society.

 

[Takai]

I still remember my stint as a juror. Insurance case. Third time it had been in court. Guess what after a week of trial and the a verdict in favor of the plantiff....they still appealed. The case couldn't have been more clear cut. Owner of a gas station was out "dipping the tanks", defendant gets in his truck backs over the plantiff and drags him for about 50 feet before noticing. Insurance company doesn't "understand" why the need to pay for anything.

Final kicker, The driver was counter suing for "damages".

Doing my civic duty never made me feel more depressed.

 

[arnisador]

Alas, an important civic duty can still be boring...but I don't have a better plan. Sometimes I like the idea of all-judge panels but then a jury nullification story comes along that I really agree with.

 

[Big Don]

I'd love to see trial by combat... Wouldn't that be great? Payperview every Friday night...

 

[Big Don]

Today, he was sentenced to 25 to life.