Jury Duty?

LOL yep... well that's another way.

--
Reisa, T1
dx-5/00 asd-7/00
Animas IR1250 pumper
Daily CHO: 150-200gm
TDD: 36-38u
Last A1C: Rising! oPPs!
"jacquie" <happikat@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:NjAph.9807$yx6.9722@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
: We had a Lady stand up when they asked if anybody knew the Lawyers in the
: case...this one Lady stood up and said I know the Defense attorney and he
is
: an A$$ hole and a crook...LOL...all of us waiting to be questioned were
: excused..LOL.. The judge requested the lady to be taken to his
: chambers...she probably got talked to
: --
: Jacquie
: "rk" <p_haha_medium@gmail.com> wrote in message
: news:LKmdnc1Abb52PjjYnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d@wideopenwest .com...
: > cathy" <cwells21@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
: > news:a88bq296n74p1771ffpqu9kkro20sg87b3@4ax.com...
: > : On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 01:23:34 GMT, "Jeff" <jeff@hotmail.com> wrote:
: > :
: > : >
: > : >"cathy" <cwells21@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
: > : >news:ekvaq2l5a64pi1r8p77s7tpf2q075lsbe0@4ax.com.. .
: > : >> Anyone here done jury duty recently?
: > : >>
: > : >> I realize that being diabetic isn't enough of a medical excuse to
get
: > : >> one out of doing jury duty, so what's the best way to deal with it
if
: > : >> I get selected for a jury?
: > : >>
: > : >> Like, is security going to give me a hard time about my meter? (the
: > : >> lancet is a sharp pointed object, after all) Should I have
something
: > : >> in writing from my doctor proving I'm diabetic and need the meter
: > with
: > : >> me?(I'm in Los Angeles, and have been assured that court house
: > : >> security is at least as restrictive as airport/TSA security, and
: > : >> probably moreso). And how do you test at the appropriate times if
: > : >> you're sitting in a jury box listening to testimony?
: > : >>
: > : >> And anything else you can think of...
: > : >>
: > : >> Thanks,
: > : >> Cathy
: > : >
: > : >Can you call the court house and ask them? I am sure that you are not
: > the
: > : >first person with this problem to be on a jury.
: > : >
: > : >You should feel honored to be chosen.
: > : >
: > : Yeah, honored. I've been "honored" seven times in the last ten years.
: > : I don't know who's hit list I'm on, but it seems the moment that 12
: > : month period ends, my name goes right back into the hopper (you can't
: > : be called more than once in a 12 month period. I'm averaging once
: > : every 14 months).
: > :
: > : However, of those seven times, I've only had to actually show up three
: > : times. Once was two days before Christmas and every single pending
: > : trial for that day was settled out of court, and the other two times I
: > : got empaneled but was excused. I hope my luck holds.
: > :
: > : Cathy
: >
: > Hit list huh? Many moons ago, I was like you, getting called at least
once
: > a year. Finally my mom told me the secret to get out and for them to
stop
: > calling you. Civic duty or not, I had a family to help feed and at $5 a
: > day,
: > mom said, "their ALL rapists, murders and I'm a bigot." <g> After being
: > called 8x in 9yrs... I finally got the nerve to say that and I've never
: > been
: > called back in 14yrs <g>
: >
: > --
: > Reisa, T1
: > dx-5/00 asd-7/00
: > Animas IR1250 pumper
: > Daily CHO: 150-200gm
: > TDD: 36-38u
: > Last A1C: Rising! oPPs!
: >
: >
:
:

"bj" <bjones44@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
news:ygAph.7524$%Q4.2848@trnddc06...
> "MaryL" <stancole1@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
> news:K0Aph.22943$kn7.19540@newsfe23.lga...
>>
>> "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom> wrote in message
>> news:9K-dnUbRJP11CTjYnZ2dnUVZ_sCinZ2d@inreach.com...
>>> Oh, I absolutely agree. I don't want the responsibility anymore, and
>>> wouldn't do a good job of it, so it's best for me to pass the honor on
>>> to those who have never served.
>>>
>>
>> I have served a number of times. Jury duty is not something where you
>> can serve once and then assume that everyone else will take "one" turn.
>>
>> It certainly is not enjoyable. It can be difficult and emotional, but I
>> agree with bj. If you are ever faced with trial -- let's say for
>> something that you did *not* do -- are you going to be happy if all of
>> the "good citizens" have opted out of jury duty and left you to the
>> possible injustices of people with an attitude like yours?
>>
>
> Did I say that here? I know I've said it any number of times "live"!
>
<snip>
bj
>
>
No, you didn't say it. I posted a follow-up to my own post almost
immediately in which I should have said that I agree with *Jeff's*
statement.

My apologies for "putting words in your mouth."

MaryL

"Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom> wrote in message
news:0s-dnQrWh-KwRTvYnZ2dnUVZ_qqrnZ2d@inreach.com...
> Fortunately, I don't have to serve anymore and I have no desire to serve
> anymore. I've made it through 60 plus years without being on trial for
> something I did not do, but if that happens, I'll take my chances that
> there are lots of "good citizens" left. I'm not really sure what that
> means though.
>
> Cheri
>
> MaryL wrote in message ...
>
>>

I'm not sure I know what it means, either. I was saying that with a certain
tongue-in-cheek attitude meaning that you would get whatever was "left
over." Ironically, though, you might also get more concerned jurors because
(at least in this jurisdiction) they are sometimes the citizens who take
"citizenship" seriously and do not try to avoid jury duty.

MaryL

Kurt wrote:
Added to that, when one
> is forced to do jury duty they run the risk of being put on a case for
> weeks at a time. Can you just give up 3 or 4 weeks of your life right
> now?
>

You should live in Washington. I could not believe this system. You
get a summons for 30 days of jury duty and have to report into the
courthouse and wait around every day. You are not even dismissed after
serving on a jury if your 30 days isn't up. They will put you on as
many trials as needed until your time is up. I didn't have any
objection to serving on a jury but when I found out they expected me to
be there every weekday for a month and serve on multiple trials - I had
to bow out. That was just too much of a financial hardship.

When I lived in California many, many years ago, I got a summons every
year and would have to call in each evening but was never actually
called for a trial. At least there you didn't have to sit in the
courthouse waiting all month and after you served on one trial you were
finished.

- Jewel

"Jewel" <cluster@seanet.com> wrote in message
news:1168597261.228425.260000@i15g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Kurt wrote:
> Added to that, when one
>> is forced to do jury duty they run the risk of being put on a case for
>> weeks at a time. Can you just give up 3 or 4 weeks of your life right
>> now?
>>
>
> You should live in Washington. I could not believe this system. You
> get a summons for 30 days of jury duty and have to report into the
> courthouse and wait around every day. You are not even dismissed after
> serving on a jury if your 30 days isn't up. They will put you on as
> many trials as needed until your time is up. I didn't have any
> objection to serving on a jury but when I found out they expected me to
> be there every weekday for a month and serve on multiple trials - I had
> to bow out. That was just too much of a financial hardship.
>

I do agree that systems such as you describe are unreasonable and create an
undue hardship -- and I say that as someone who ordinarily encourages people
not to try to get out of jury duty. In my opinion, the jurisdiction where I
live is much more reasonable. I should also preface this by saying that I
live in a small town where the crime rate is fairly low. State law governs
the procedure, but there are also many variations in different jurisdictions
where judges and other court personnel create more or less flexibility
(depending on the jurisdiction). Names of potential jurors are drawn from
two sources -- registered voters and those with driver's licenses. The two
sources are supposed to be coordinated so that a person's name is on the
"list" only once, but I am sure that this theory does not always work out in
practice. In this community, District Court usually selects juries for the
upcoming two weeks. Trials are scheduled, and most jury trials last for one
or two days. Longer trials are rare. Other courts, such as Municipal
Court, have different schedules but a jury summons is usually only for a
single day. By state law, there is a maximum number of juries that a person
can be required to participate in each year (sorry, I don't remember the
number). There have been a couple of years when I received a jury summons
more than once during the calendar year, but it has been more common for
several years to go by before I receive another summons. I have served on
several criminal juries -- from a very old and very complex murder case to a
simple Municipal Court misdemeanor case (the type of trial that does not
exist in most states). I have never served as a juror in a civil trial.

--
MaryL

> When I lived in California many, many years ago, I got a summons every
> year and would have to call in each evening but was never actually
> called for a trial. At least there you didn't have to sit in the
> courthouse waiting all month and after you served on one trial you were
> finished.
>
> - Jewel
>

[Default] On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:17:32 GMT, "Jeff" <jeff@hotmail.com>
Giggled into the madness of usenet:

>
>"cathy" <cwells21@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:86sdq2prpojabm2lc7lkt5e281is51ravr@4ax.com.. .
>> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 00:16:14 GMT, "Jeff" <jeff@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"jacquie" <happikat@nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>news:_eAph.13277$X72.7345@newsread3.news.pas.ea rthlink.net...
>>>>I have been picked to be in the Jury Pool...but actually have only been
>>>>picked once...It was an ugly murder trial.
>>>> --
>>>> Jacquie
>>>
>>>Have you ever seen a pretty murder trial?
>>>
>>>
>> I have to comment on this. There may not be pretty murder trials, but
>> there are cut and dried ones. The last jury duty I didI was called for
>> a murder trial. The judge went into great detail about what the case
>> consisted of, and frankly it should never have come to trial. By the
>> time he was done explaining I already had my mind made up.
>>
>> The defendant had stolen a car, led the police on a high speed chase
>> through LA =on television=, and during the course of the chase, hit a
>> car whose driver subsequently died. This was all captured =on
>> television=. And I even remember watching that chase on TV.
>>
>> The defendant had two attorneys of some African nationality who were
>> virtually incomprehensible. They spoke very softly, very fast, and
>> very heavily accented (if I had been selected for the jury, I would
>> have complained that I couldn't hear them, I know I wasn't the only
>> one).
>>
>> The prosecution had a list of 21 witnesses. The defense had none. The
>> whole thing was a joke, and a waste of the taxpayers money and time.
>> The whole thing was about as black and white as it gets. So maybe not
>> pretty, but not what I'd call ugly.
>
>That's sounds plenty ugly to me.
>
>While you see a cut and dried case, I see a case where the defense was
>incompetent. If you saw the chase on TV, you were probably prejudiced and
>shouldn't have been on the jury. Perhaps there should have been a different
>venu.The defense lawyers should have known that. There were no defense
>witnesses. Again, it sounds like the defense lawyers should have known
>better. And, the defendents lanquage problems make me thing public
>defenders.

she said she wasn't selected for the jury.


--
Mâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper
Type 1 since 1975
http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org
http://www.diabetic-talk.org
http://www.insulin-pumpers.org
http://www.pandora.com enter "Jason & Demarco"



"To announce that there must be no criticism of the
President, or that we are to stand by the President
right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile,
but is morally treasonable to the American public."
....Theodore Roosevelt

(o ô)
--ooO-(_)-Ooo--------------------

"I don't know half of you
half as well as I should like;
and I like less than half of you
half as well as you deserve."
....Bilbo Baggins


DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate...
..

"Ma¢k" <stopthespam@shootspammers.com> wrote in message
news:nvueq2l862sp2ff0klmvs4g0fl0p77c8fo@4ax.com...
> [Default] On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:17:32 GMT, "Jeff" <jeff@hotmail.com>
> Giggled into the madness of usenet:
>
>>
>>"cathy" <cwells21@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:86sdq2prpojabm2lc7lkt5e281is51ravr@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 00:16:14 GMT, "Jeff" <jeff@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"jacquie" <happikat@nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:_eAph.13277$X72.7345@newsread3.news.pas.e arthlink.net...
>>>>>I have been picked to be in the Jury Pool...but actually have only been
>>>>>picked once...It was an ugly murder trial.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jacquie
>>>>
>>>>Have you ever seen a pretty murder trial?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I have to comment on this. There may not be pretty murder trials, but
>>> there are cut and dried ones. The last jury duty I didI was called for
>>> a murder trial. The judge went into great detail about what the case
>>> consisted of, and frankly it should never have come to trial. By the
>>> time he was done explaining I already had my mind made up.
>>>
>>> The defendant had stolen a car, led the police on a high speed chase
>>> through LA =on television=, and during the course of the chase, hit a
>>> car whose driver subsequently died. This was all captured =on
>>> television=. And I even remember watching that chase on TV.
>>>
>>> The defendant had two attorneys of some African nationality who were
>>> virtually incomprehensible. They spoke very softly, very fast, and
>>> very heavily accented (if I had been selected for the jury, I would
>>> have complained that I couldn't hear them, I know I wasn't the only
>>> one).
>>>
>>> The prosecution had a list of 21 witnesses. The defense had none. The
>>> whole thing was a joke, and a waste of the taxpayers money and time.
>>> The whole thing was about as black and white as it gets. So maybe not
>>> pretty, but not what I'd call ugly.
>>
>>That's sounds plenty ugly to me.
>>
>>While you see a cut and dried case, I see a case where the defense was
>>incompetent. If you saw the chase on TV, you were probably prejudiced and
>>shouldn't have been on the jury. Perhaps there should have been a
>>different
>>venu.The defense lawyers should have known that. There were no defense
>>witnesses. Again, it sounds like the defense lawyers should have known
>>better. And, the defendents lanquage problems make me thing public
>>defenders.
>
> she said she wasn't selected for the jury.

I noticed that.

I was commenting about the case, not her selection or lack thereof.

Jeff

> --
> Mâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper
> Type 1 since 1975
> http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org
> http://www.diabetic-talk.org
> http://www.insulin-pumpers.org
> http://www.pandora.com enter "Jason & Demarco"
>
>
>
> "To announce that there must be no criticism of the
> President, or that we are to stand by the President
> right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile,
> but is morally treasonable to the American public."
> ...Theodore Roosevelt
>
> (o ô)
> --ooO-(_)-Ooo--------------------
>
> "I don't know half of you
> half as well as I should like;
> and I like less than half of you
> half as well as you deserve."
> ....Bilbo Baggins
>
>
> DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me
> offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
> If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
> me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate...
> .
>
>
>

"MaryL" <stancole1@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
news:gcHph.32265$oA1.10878@newsfe19.lga...
>
> "bj" <bjones44@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
> news:ygAph.7524$%Q4.2848@trnddc06...
>> "MaryL" <stancole1@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
>> news:K0Aph.22943$kn7.19540@newsfe23.lga...
>>>
>>> I have served a number of times. Jury duty is not something where you
>>> can serve once and then assume that everyone else will take "one" turn.
>>>
>>> It certainly is not enjoyable. It can be difficult and emotional, but I
>>> agree with bj. If you are ever faced with trial -- let's say for
>>> something that you did *not* do -- are you going to be happy if all of
>>> the "good citizens" have opted out of jury duty and left you to the
>>> possible injustices of people with an attitude like yours?
>>>
>>
>> Did I say that here? I know I've said it any number of times "live"!
>>
> <snip>
> bj
>>
>>
> No, you didn't say it. I posted a follow-up to my own post almost
> immediately in which I should have said that I agree with *Jeff's*
> statement.
>
> My apologies for "putting words in your mouth."
>
> MaryL

Well, you didn't put them there, they've been there for years!
bj

rk wrote:
> "Mnop" <pqrs@mailinator.com> wrote in message
> news:50nobfF1gjjl1U1@mid.individual.net...
>> rk wrote:
>>> Hit list huh? Many moons ago, I was like you, getting called at
>>> least once a year. Finally my mom told me the secret to get out
>>> and for them to stop calling you. Civic duty or not, I had a
>>> family to help feed and at $5 a day,
>>> mom said, "their ALL rapists, murders and I'm a bigot." <g> After
>>> being called 8x in 9yrs... I finally got the nerve to say that and
>>> I've never been called back in 14yrs <g>
>>
>> So that's the trick - say something which is ungrammatical
>> & doesn't make sense?
>>
>> "their ALL rapists, murders and I'm a bigot"
>>
>> What does this even start to mean?
>>
>>
>>
> means you apparently can't comprehend.

"Their" isn't a contraction of "They are".
It means something totally different.


> another spectator spouting off without contribution
> to DM.

In article <1168597261.228425.260000@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups .com>,
"Jewel" <cluster@seanet.com> wrote:

> You should live in Washington. I could not believe this system. You
> get a summons for 30 days of jury duty and have to report into the
> courthouse and wait around every day. You are not even dismissed after
> serving on a jury if your 30 days isn't up. They will put you on as
> many trials as needed until your time is up. I didn't have any
> objection to serving on a jury but when I found out they expected me to
> be there every weekday for a month and serve on multiple trials - I had
> to bow out. That was just too much of a financial hardship.
>
> When I lived in California many, many years ago, I got a summons every
> year and would have to call in each evening but was never actually
> called for a trial. At least there you didn't have to sit in the
> courthouse waiting all month and after you served on one trial you were
> finished.

I don't want to bum you out, but here in Massachusetts we have "one day
or one trial." If you sit around for a day without being put on a jury,
you're done and you can't be called again for three years. If you're
put on a jury, you're done whenever that trial ends, and you can't be
called again for three years.

I've never been put on a jury, although I've sat around reading for a
day in several court houses. (In one small one, they showed us movies.)

I have a feeling I'm jinxing myself, because I became eligible again at
the end of this past September. I'm willing to do my civil duty, but
sitting around for a day is b-o-r-i-n-g.

Priscilla

Then the "concerned" should certainly serve, and serve often if they so
desire. I don't have to anymore, for which I am grateful, though I don't
think not wanting to serve on a jury over and over again, makes one a
bad citizen, or means they are not taking citizenship seriously. It
means they know their limitations now, and knowing ones limitations
makes for a much a better citizen, and certainly a better juror IMO. :-)

Cheri



MaryL wrote in message ...


>over." Ironically, though, you might also get more concerned jurors
because
>(at least in this jurisdiction) they are sometimes the citizens who
take
>"citizenship" seriously and do not try to avoid jury duty.
>
>MaryL

"Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze23t8n@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:vze23t8n-035613.12205012012007@individual.net...
> In article <1168597261.228425.260000@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups .com>,
> "Jewel" <cluster@seanet.com> wrote:
>
>> You should live in Washington. I could not believe this system. You
>> get a summons for 30 days of jury duty and have to report into the
>> courthouse and wait around every day. You are not even dismissed after
>> serving on a jury if your 30 days isn't up. They will put you on as
>> many trials as needed until your time is up. I didn't have any
>> objection to serving on a jury but when I found out they expected me to
>> be there every weekday for a month and serve on multiple trials - I had
>> to bow out. That was just too much of a financial hardship.
>>
>> When I lived in California many, many years ago, I got a summons every
>> year and would have to call in each evening but was never actually
>> called for a trial. At least there you didn't have to sit in the
>> courthouse waiting all month and after you served on one trial you were
>> finished.
>
> I don't want to bum you out, but here in Massachusetts we have "one day
> or one trial." If you sit around for a day without being put on a jury,
> you're done and you can't be called again for three years. If you're
> put on a jury, you're done whenever that trial ends, and you can't be
> called again for three years.
>
> I've never been put on a jury, although I've sat around reading for a
> day in several court houses. (In one small one, they showed us movies.)
>
> I have a feeling I'm jinxing myself, because I became eligible again at
> the end of this past September. I'm willing to do my civil duty, but
> sitting around for a day is b-o-r-i-n-g.

Bring your laptop with some DVDs. I guess the alternative is to have to
report fewer times, but have to report for several days in a row.

Jeff
> Priscilla