# Jury Duty.....AGAIN! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 13, 2005, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515 "2005-01-13T06:00:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/21 "2005-01-13T18:38:21Z")
> [@Cliffy](#): > > Oh for heaven’s sake can we make it trhough one thread where the j-word comes up without sidetracking it into the nullification argument? [whiny 5 year old voice] AWWWWWW, but he started it [/whiny 5 year old voice] ---
**Author:** ![Flander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8c91f0/32.png) [@Flander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flander)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/22 "2005-01-13T19:00:46Z")
I just wanted to say that I’m 24, and have been called 3 times already. Neither my twin brother nor by father have received any. FUCK them, and FUCK JURY DUTY! “It’s your duty as a citizen and we’ll give you $15 for the day.” **FUCK YOU!** ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/23 "2005-01-13T19:12:49Z")
I have jury duty coming up, and I’m looking forward to it. I’ve done it once before and was on a week-long misdemeanor domestic abuse trial. Very interesting experience – I hope I get chosen again this time. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Roboto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/76d3ee/32.png) [@Mr.Roboto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Roboto)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/24 "2005-01-13T20:37:05Z")
Caphis: Dude, It can be a good experience, please don’t let my post sway you. Elza B: That was my experience, I was involved in a criminal trial where we, as a jury were told upfront, there would be NO physical eveidence.It was a case of identification that crossed racial lines. I was the only innocent hold-out and endured 2-days of verbal venomous assault for the same reasons you described. I’m a big guy and I don’t get intimidated,however, a little female immediately change her Not guilty plea to guilty when she was confronted. ---
**Author:** ![Fretful\_Porpentine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fretful_porpentine/32/2873_2.png) [@Fretful\_Porpentine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fretful_Porpentine)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/25 "2005-01-14T03:10:59Z")
I’ve been called twice but never actually served on a jury – both times, they had us sit around in the courthouse basement for a while and then dismissed _everybody_ within an hour. I suppose I don’t actually _mind_ being paid twelve bucks for an hour of doing nothing, but it was rather disappointing, and I’d probably be quite annoyed if I’d had to take unpaid time off from work. Neither of my parents has ever been called (in thirty-five years of eligibility). Go figure. ---
**Author:** ![caphis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19adc/32.png) [@caphis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caphis)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/26 "2005-01-14T03:25:12Z")
> [@Mr. Roboto](#): > > Caphis: Dude, It can be a good experience, please don’t let my post sway you. Oh, no, what I meant was “I WAS looking forward to it… until I realized I couldn’t do it.” ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/27 "2005-01-14T03:35:30Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Really? Could I ask you for a cite? One that was decided in the last 30 years or so, and not from the 1700 - 1800’s. You believe in germs? Really? Could I ask you for a picture? One that was taken with an ordinary camera, not one of those microscope doohickies? You believe that OJ is guilty? Really? Could I ask you for some item of evidence? One that was never touched in any way by that racist LAPD? I trust that my point about the fallacy of _ad hoc_ category creation for the purpose of excluding inconvenient evidence (aka the “no true Scotsman” fallacy) is made. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/28 "2005-01-14T03:39:29Z")
Er, the _Sparf_ case merely upholds the judge’s discretion to not inform the jury about nullification. It does not overturn the doctrine itself. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/29 "2005-01-14T03:45:56Z")
The trick, of course, is to say you’re prejudiced against all races. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/30 "2005-01-14T05:25:06Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > The trick, of course, is to say you’re prejudiced against all races. Or “I’d be a great juror. I can spot a guilty man from a mile away!” ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515/31 "2005-01-14T12:46:50Z")
> [@Steve MB](#): > > I trust that my point about the fallacy of _ad hoc_ category creation for the purpose of excluding inconvenient evidence (aka the “no true Scotsman” fallacy) is made. At the risk of pissing off **Cliffy** , I will point out that the exact amount of years since the decision was not meant to be a specific limit, i/e I would refuse to consider caselaw 30 years, 2 months old. It was meant to limit the discussion to authorities that have some binding, legal authority. Citing constitutional provision, without a discussion of the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the provision, is misleading. As is relying on a case that was decided in the 1800’s when the same courts have spoken on the issue in modern times. The date of the decision is certainly relevant in judging that citations authority. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-duty-again/284515.md?page=1)