# Jury Incompetence - f\*ck justice and all that! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 16, 2000, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761 "2000-07-16T20:23:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2000, 9:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/61 "2000-07-18T09:59:36Z")
To all of those who bad-mouthed our jury system: The next time you get a summons for jury duty, don’t try to wiggle out of it. REPORT AND SERVE! Regarding O.J., I think he probably did it. I think the jury thought he probably did it. But probably don’t cut it! Between the completely fucked up prosecution, the dire mistakes by prosecution witness’s, and the perjury of not one but two prosecution witness’s created a lot of reasonable doubt. And according to our law, guilt must be proven BEYOND that reasonable doubt. The jury did the right thing. You want to blame someone, start with Marcia Clark and work your way down. Just for the record, in most states a judge CAN nullify a guilty verdict in a criminal trial in some cases. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2000, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/62 "2000-07-18T13:44:31Z")
**Danielinthewolvesden** : > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > \*While I agree the DA did a piss-poor job of prosecuting that murderous piece of shit, I think anybody who believes the OJ jury adequately performed their civic duty is a dimwit. > > Look at yor last paragraph there, xeno, ol’buddy, and you will see the jury DID “perform their civic duty”. They cannot decide on guilt based on gut feelings, or evidence we saw but they didn’t, but on whether or not the DA proved her case beyond “all reasonable doubt”. And she didn’t, and you (&I) agree on that, and thus they were right to vote “not guilty”, even if; in yours, mine and 70% of America’s opinion the bastard is as guilty as hell. > > And if you WERE one of those extreme few that followed the trial religously, and read all the doc, BUT did not read or hear or see anything that the Jury did not, then I apologize. Yes, I know you didn’t, but you did see/hear enuf to form a reasonable opinion OJ was guilty, and I agree with you. But if you did not see ONLY and ALL the evidence the Jury saw, you should not condemn their decision.\* Okey doke, Daniel, I just looked at my last paragraph. What’s your point, dude? Did you mean to say “hey xeno, ol’ buddy, look at the facts the way I see them”, or did you actually see something in my paragraph (perhaps in some sort of code that I was unaware of when I wrote it) that addressed whether the jury should’ve considered evidence that wasn’t presented to them? Or are you just _really bad_ at sequential logic? Actually, I do know what was presented to the jury. I also know, from interviews with jury members after the verdict, that they neither understood nor considered most of the mountain of circumstantial evidence presented against OJ. I also know that, after sitting in the jury box for months of an extremely complicated and convoluted trial, they took less time to consider their verdict than most people take to pick out a livingroom suite. _Fuck them._ They were tired of the trial and they took the easy way out. You think they did their civic duty by sitting through the trial? That was only half of their duty. They were supposed to actually _pay attention_ and consider the evidence presented. I believe that our system of jurisprudence works quite well when all persons involved take their civic duty seriously. I _do not_ agree with the OP that some form of qualification is required, other than the attorney challenges which already exist. But in regards to the OJ jury, I stand by my assertion that they _did not_ perform their duties conscientiously in that trial. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2000, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/63 "2000-07-18T14:10:23Z")
[QUOTE I believe that our system of jurisprudence works quite well when all persons involved take their civic duty seriously. I _do not_ agree with the OP that some form of qualification is required, other than the attorney challenges which already exist. But in regards to the OJ jury, I stand by my assertion that they _did not_ perform their duties conscientiously in that trial. \*\*[/QUOTE] What part of ‘reasonable doubt’ don’t you understand? The jury cannot, repeat CANNOT consider anything but the evidence they were presented with. And they were presented with a detective who mishandled evidence, a coroner who did not peform standard tests, a forensic technician who, at best, misrepresented what he did at the crime scene, and a detective who commited perjury. You cannot see where the jury found reasonable doubt? ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2000, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/64 "2000-07-18T14:32:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by spooje \* > \*\*To all of those who bad-mouthed our jury system: > > The next time you get a summons for jury duty, don’t try to wiggle out of it. REPORT AND SERVE! > > \*\* [Stands up and begins applauding wildly] Here is one I heard about–without even knowing any more of the facts, it makes me want to choke. A 911 dispatcher made a bad judgment call and didn’t give a high enough priority to a plea from a woman who thought her estranged husband might be planning to do her harm. Sure enough, the guy came over, broke down the door, and shot her dead, just as she feared. Cops got there too late. A horrible tragedy, and a real screw-up on the part of the dispatcher. Well, litigation ensued. The jury found, as I would have expected, that the 911 dispatcher was naughty. But get this: they determined that she was MORE THAN 50% responsible for the death. Uh, folks? What about the guy who loaded up the gun, broke her door down, and shot her? Maybe that guy was the primary reason she’s dead? Is that too much of a stretch!!! ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2000, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/65 "2000-07-18T14:33:33Z")
> [@](#): > > _What part of ‘reasonable doubt’ don’t you understand? The jury cannot, repeat CANNOT consider anything but the evidence they were presented with. And they were presented with a detective who mishandled evidence, a coroner who did not peform standard tests, a forensic technician who, at best, misrepresented what he did at the crime scene, and a detective who commited perjury. You cannot see where the jury found reasonable doubt?_ Fuck you too, **spooje**. I completely understand “reasonable doubt”, you supercilious twit. Do _you_ understand that the members of the jury HAVE STATED PUBLICLY that they did not bother to consider much of the evidence? That they were swayed emotionally by the arbitrary allegations made by the defense team without considering their relevance? Do you recall that they took **under four hours** to deliberate? I can understand (but not agree with) a “not guilty” verdict in this case from a jury which considered the evidence and the arguments delivered by both sides. _But we know from what they’ve told us that this jury did not!_ So you and Daniel can take your “reasonable doubt” moral high ground bullshit and shove it up your respective arses. ---
**Author:** ![Ceejaytee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ceejaytee/32/2956_2.png) [@Ceejaytee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ceejaytee)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2000, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/66 "2000-07-18T14:52:18Z")
…held in the United States every day, the stupid results of some outweigh the justice applied in all the others. Yeah, some jurors are stupid, some don’t understand how people can be evil, some don’t understand people different from them…but what about the rest of us? I served on my first jury last year–4 defendants busted for selling coke. The jury was a complete mix of colors, genders, salaries, intelligence, and life experience. The two black people on our jury didn’t trust the cop as far as they could throw him (the defendants were all hispanic; the black jurors just had different experiences with the cops than the rest of us). The banker didn’t understand how things worked in the inner city. Some of us didn’t understand drug terminology. But we worked it out. 2 guilty, 2 not guilty (one of the guilty guys skipped town just before the verdict came down; hope they found his ass). It took all day to deliberate and there was alot of misunderstandings and some anger. But we gave it the best we had and I think we reached the right verdict. I didn’t try to dodge jury duty. I don’t think I’m a “fucking retard” because I couldn’t get out of jury duty. I’m glad I served. Who the hell would I be to rant about the system if I didn’t bother to serve in it? And just because lawyers pick the jury, that doesn’t make prevent it from being impartial. _Both_ sides pick the jury–not just one side. That’s why it’s impartial. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2000, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/67 "2000-07-18T14:52:24Z")
You must have seen a different show than the one I saw. It was on A&E called ‘O.J…What went wrong’ or some such nonsense. Anyway, they interviewed 6 of the jurors for the show, and they all seemed like rational intelligent folks while they described the proccess by which they arrived at their decision. They were regular folks, sequestered for 9 months,(NINE MONTHS) who saw evidence presented from BOTH sides. They explained, for reasons I mentioned earlier, that maybe the state’s case wasn’t that great, what with the perjury and incompetence and all. Being the nice person I am, I will give these citizens, who sacrificed a lot, the benefit of the doubt as to their civic duty being performed. Maybe you should view that program. I’m certain it is available form the A&E website. It made a pretty compelling argument. Just a thought. Your friend, spooje. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Zero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c4cdca/32.png) [@Saint\_Zero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Zero)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2000, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/68 "2000-07-18T15:22:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Pizzle Boy \* > \*\*Why do these always turn into an OJ dicussion? > > Watch the movie: Mississippi Burning. (I think that’s the one with Samuel Jackson when he shoots the guy who beat up and raped his daughter. Sorry if this is the wrong movie 🙂 ) > \*\* Miss Burning isn’t even accurate enough to laugh at. And the movie you’re looking for is “A Time to Kill.” which is better, from what little snippets I’ve seen. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2000, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/69 "2000-07-18T15:29:25Z")
**spooje** , I’ll take a look at that program, if I can find it. I’ve only seen print reports of interviews with jury members (if this were GD I’d look for references). I also apologize for my tone with you. (I guess I’m riding my own “high horse” sometimes.) -Although, this being the 'Pit, I’m not _too_ apologetic! The main problem I have with this particular jury is that they _seemingly_ made no active efforts to understand the forensic evidence, or to objectively consider the relevance of the defense’s assertions of conspiracy and racism. I don’t say that it is an easy thing to sit jury on a murder trial. But I think the minimum civic requirement is open consideration of all testimony and argument. And I think it’s pretty clear that this jury did not want to take that trouble. ---
**Author:** ![Kat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b19c9b/32.png) [@Kat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kat)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2000, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/70 "2000-07-19T03:31:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Major Feelgud \* > To me, the temperature of the coffee wass not the issue. I don’t really give a flying fuck if the coffee was thermonuclear hot. The fact is the old lady was driving or something and poured coffee on herself by herself. If she was so concerned about not getting burnt, she should have waited before drinking it. > > We all should learn to take some responsibility. What if she had made the coffee herself? Who would she have sued then, herself? Uh, yeah. [Hot Coffee Case](http://www.injurycases.com/coffee.html) > [@](#): > > At the trial of this case, it was revealed that while coffee served in your home, in a restaurant, on an airplane or in a fast food establishment is normally in the range of 135-145 degrees, McDonald’s routinely sold its coffee nationwide at 180-190 degrees. Liquid heated to such a high temperature becomes extremely dangerous when it comes in contact with human body tissue. That is why on the date of her accident, after the car in which she was a passenger came to a full stop - and Ms. Lieback tried to lift the lid of the cup of coffee off while she held the cup between her knees and accidentally spilled the liquid on her thighs and genital area - the burns were immediate, painful, and serious. > [@](#): > > In pretrial discovery, Ms. Lieback’s attorney learned that McDonald’s had already been sued some 700 other times(!) for burn injuries caused by their hot coffee- and that they had routinely settled with the injured party, requiring each person to sign a confidentiality agreement, barring the person from talking about the nature of settlement. At the trial of the case, a McDonald’s representative maintained that it was appropriate to continue to serve the coffee at 180 degrees, although people were going to get burned, because the numbers of burned people were “statistically insignificant.” Additional sites: [The McDonald’s Coffee Case](http://www.consumerrights.net/mcdonalds.html) Notes: “The simple accident caused third-degree burns on more than 6 percent of her body.” (When I spilled just-boiled water on myself in junior high, I only received second-degree burns.) Also > [@](#): > > McDonald’s had already ignored more than 700 similar claims of coffee burns, many involving children. The company even ignored a request from the Shriner’s Burn Institute in Cincinnati to turn down its coffee. > McDonald’s refused to pay the then 79-year-old woman’s initial medical expenses totaling $11,000. McDonald’s actually countered with an offer of $800. And they also refused to turn down the heat on their coffee. Left with $20,000 unpaid bills, she finally hired a lawyer. [McDonald’s Case](http://www.accidentline.com/McDonalds.htm) - Easy to read Facts List [The Coffee Spill Heard Round the World](http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/pagana/mg312/coffee.html) Enough sources for you, Bear? ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2000, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/71 "2000-07-19T05:13:41Z")
If the judges do the judging, then no corrupt cop will be ever convicted of anything. ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2000, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/72 "2000-07-19T05:20:00Z")
By the way, in the OJ case, Mark Furman ruined almost the entire case. Then there was that glove-fitting exhbition. Those two pieces of evidence were not in the civil trial, of which OJ was found liable for the deaths. ---
**Author:** ![Major\_Feelgud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3be4f8/32.png) [@Major\_Feelgud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Major_Feelgud)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2000, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/73 "2000-07-19T06:28:26Z")
To Kat: Quote: “Ms. Lieback tried to lift the lid of the cup of coffee off while she held the cup between her knees and accidentally spilled the liquid on her thighs and genital area - the burns were immediate, painful, and serious.” Therein lies the liability. Don’t fucking hold cups between knees to open them. As I said in another topic. Don’t think this case has anything to do with justice. It doesn’t have anything to do with the temperature of the coffeee. It has to do with the fact that McDonalds has a lot of money. You think the lawyers would have bothered if the coffee was bought from a coffee stand? The temperature of the coffee was irrelevant. McDonalds was sued because it had a lot of money, and that’s the fact, Jack. ---
**Author:** ![Kat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b19c9b/32.png) [@Kat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kat)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2000, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/74 "2000-07-19T06:59:19Z")
I don’t know–do you know of any coffee stands that have been sued 700 times for severe burns caused by serving their coffee about 40 degrees hotter than other coffee stands? ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2000, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/75 "2000-07-19T07:03:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by capacitor \* > \*\*If the judges do the judging, then no corrupt cop will be ever convicted of anything. \*\* I would hope that corrupt cops WOULD be convicted. ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2000, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761/76 "2000-07-19T23:55:13Z")
Kat said: > [@](#): > > Enough sources for you, Bear? Yes, thank you. I will take time to read them. However, I do still believe that people love to point the finger and make other people responsible for their mistakes. If the coffee was so dangerous to people’s flesh, then how do millions of other people drink it with ease. I dunno, this kind of gets off the OP anyway. Gotta go, I have some reading to do… thanks Kat [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jury-incompetence-f-ck-justice-and-all-that/25761.md?page=3)