I’ve served once, had one case, which lasted 3 1/2 days. We found the guy not guilty on the grounds that one of the police witnesses, the one who was, in fact, crucial to proving the case was pretty obviously lying* and *had it in for the defendant. The case certainly wasn’t proven beyond reasonable doubt. This was quite a while ago. I didn’t believe all police were trustworthy then and have since heard so much more about police corruption that I am more certain that we gave the correct verdict than I was at the time.
I was summoned, but didn’t serve. The basics of the case were as follows:
A rear-ended B. B was not seriously injured. Two witnesses, C and D, knew B and claimed to be emotionally traumatized by the event, and are suing A for emotional damages. B was not involved in the case (the rear-ending was either settled out of court, handled by insurance, or whatever).
I was one of the first 12 prospective jurors chosen. When asked if there was any reason why I thought I might not be a good fit, I told the judge that I thought the case was absurd, that there was no conceivable way I could find for the prosecution, and that therefore I was biased. The judge said “I thank you for your candor” and dismissed me.
I’m 34, have lived in one state since 19, US Citizen the whole time, had a driver’s license and registered to vote, and I’ve never heard a peep from the legal system. Kind of disappointing, really. I think it’d be interesting to serve, though inevitably it’ll be at the least convenient possible time.
I’ve served once on a jury. It was a civil case that went for a week, at which point the parties reached a settlement and the jury was discharged without giving a verdict.
I’ve been on the jury roll on a number of occasions, although I’m not on it at the moment. I suppose I’ve received about 10-12 summons over the years, and have had to turn up at the court on about 5-6 occasions. The last was in October 2010 for a murder trial.
Summoned twice but never served. In both cases, the juries were dismissed at the last minute because the parties settled on some agreement.
Called twice, served once. Criminal trial.
Junior hung with Jamaican Drug Dealer. Jr takes enormous amount of product on consignment, then loses it, the money, or something, and JMD wants his shit back. Jr goes into hiding, so someone with a Jamaican accent and unique tattoo breaks in to Jr.'s parents home, ties them up, tortures and terrorizes them, and leaves death threats on their machine. Since Jr. had introduced JMD to mom & pop a while back, it was a slam dunk, but he denied any involvement to the end, even after we listened to the messages and saw the tattoo. Dumbass. Half a dozen felonies got him life.
Glad to have helped!
Twice when I was in the courtroom but only once under voir dire. The first time I was one of about 50 prospective jurors, but was never called. There were only three of us left when the jury was seated.
The second time I was called fairly early, but rejected by the prosecutor, whose side I was sympathetic to.
Yup, but it was for only 3 hours each day. I chose the earlier shift, which was from 10am-1pm Mon-Fri. (Since I work from 12-8pm each day, I luckily only missed one hour each day!)
I had a good time, to tell the truth, I’ve always wanted to be on a jury, although by the 3rd week I got *really *bored of having to hear drug testing lab results read out loud.
Served on three trials - all of them somewhat interesting. Best one was for a lawyer (a criminal defense lawyer) accused of taking payments for defending his client (a drug dealer) in cocaine. Here is a hint - if you are taking your payment in drugs rather than cash or check, remember that your client is a drug dealer and you shouldn’t be surprised to learn that his phone is tapped.
Dude wasn’t even the target of the wiretap, but provided enough evidence for the DA to make a ‘bonus’ conviction. Drugs just make you stupid.
Never served on a jury, but have been summoned 3 times. Once for a county I hadn’t lived in since I was 13 (I was 20 at the time.)
The last time I was summoned, and this was the best, was to be a juror on my own trial. They wouldn’t let me do it though. 
I have only been called a handful of times - all in Northern California - and noticed that people in technical professions are seldom put on a jury for a civil case, something that has been noticed by many of my colleagues as well. When I have been picked, it has been for a criminal case.
Selected once, defendant accepted a plea deal the day of the trial, so we were dismissed.
Yep. I’m still stunned when I think of it. :mad:
Apologies for hijacking this thread…
We were very frustrated when our verdict got overturned the first time ‘round, though we expected it. Most of the prosecutors’ evidence and witnesses was for pointless character assassination, and anyone on the outside looking in could easily imagine our verdict was heavily affected by just finding the dude a complete scumbag, rather than on evidence that specifically pointed to him being guilty. However, we know what we convicted him on, and we couldn’t talk about it to anyone (we were under a gag order by the judge after the trial), and it was maddening to see people smearing us when we had specifically ignored all that extraneous stuff in deliberation
I still feel we made the right decision (and considering he was found guilty again by two later juries I think we’re vindicated), but the constant reaching for more and more bizarre stuff (that cellmate of his that came forward, for instance), as well as every prosecution team’s “throw everything at him and see what sticks” strategy makes it look like a farce. A lot of people who feel that he’s innocent put too much emphasis on the basketball game he was playing beforehand, when an actual timeline of that night’s events gives him a pretty good window of opportunity, the witnesses that provided him with his alibi had colluded to sync their testimonies, etc.
What we convicted him on was blood- and tissue-spatter evidence and DNA. The defense expert witness on spatter evidence even admitted under cross-examination that David’s clothing (clothing he had testified that he had worn the entire time) was undoubtedly present at the murder scene, and defense never tried to bat that damning bit down. Unfortunately, the testing done at the time was destructive in nature, and I think later prosecutors have been hampered by that.
I haven’t read the book, haven’t watched the various 48 Hours episodes on the case, and due to a heavy work/school schedule, lost track of the goings-on of the retrials, so I’m not too up on any of the specifics of those later trials. I broke down the last time I was in the New Albany area; my friends and I were driving around and we happened to drive by some of the crime scenes we were taken to, and I ended up having weird flashes of some of the worst stuff we had to see.
I’m considering it, but am very wary of doing so. The Camm family and supporters are still pretty vocal online, and I do have a bit of fear that a thread on the case involving one of the original jurors would draw them out. When the jury announced its verdict, some of his family attempted to jump the barrier to come after us, and they confronted us as we attempted to leave the courthouse that night, so I’m not keen on crossing their paths again. It would also be exceedingly easy for anyone who took interest in the original trial to figure out who I am
I also have a bit of a problem still talking about the case from my perspective. We as a jury decided what we did, and it would be unfair for me to put my own personal spin on everything. After the trial, we refused interviews as individuals, and only gave interviews as groups, usually with WLKY-TV. That was even the case a few years later when the second trial began.
I was called and interviewed for a child molestation case last summer. The defendant’s attorney was trying to find people that would agree that a child that young would lie about being molested. . After extensive interviews with the 30 or 40 of us, they were unable to pick a jury that could be impartial when the victim was under 7.
I served as an alternate juror on a murder trial, which meant I had to attend the entire trial but was excused from the deliberations because none of the regular jurors dropped out. Two guys were on trial… I thought one was innocent and the other probably did it but the prosecution didn’t make a strong enough case to pass the “reasonable doubt” test. I called to find out the verdict and they were both acquitted. I was actually very glad I didn’t have to make a decision because I felt uncertain about exactly what “reasonable doubt” meant for me.
I’m in Northern California also, and haven’t noticed that at all.
The first case I was on involved a woman who claimed she was injured in a BART elevator. One of the potential jurors was a mechanical engineer who had served as an expert witness in some cases. He was excused because he said he could not park his expertise outside the jury room, basically saying that he could not believe bs technical testimony that went against his technical experience. However my CS degree never seemed to be an issue.
Since people are discussing cases, that one was interesting. The lawyer for BART was very active in asking questions of the jurors. The lawyer for the woman didn’t seem to be concerned. My guess was that he told the woman she would be much better off taking the offer from BART, but that she had a dream of having a jury which would be sympathetic. I don’t think she liked the makeup of the jury she got, and so agreed right after we were empaneled. His lack of interest came from knowing full well how it was going to go.
My mother, a SAHM, used to get jury summonses all the time. She hated the very idea of jury duty. On a few occasions she got to the voir dire and at least once it was an auto accident. She told them, truthfully, “My husband was almost killed in a car accident. I’d give the plaintiff twice what he’s asking without even hearing any evidence.” Dismissed, thank you. My dad OTOH, loved jury duty, but almost never got asked.
Is there a site online that has a complete chronology? When I google, the sites say that the third trial is pending. Thanks. Sorry you had to go through that.
I have been sent a summons a number of times (although not in the past 2 years or so…so, of course, there will probably be one waiting for me in today’s mail), but have only had to appear once, and even then, I was excused from the one jury for which I was selected, so I have never actually sat on a jury for a trial.