The Jury Duty plot versus reality

Inspired by this thread

All sorts of TV series fill time by having the main character have jury duty, but some of them seem pretty unlikely. Here’s my take:

All in the Family - Edith is a very plausible juror; she votes so she gets picked, she has no connection to law enforcement so she’s not excluded.

Andy Griffith Show - Aunt Bee is pretty plausible - easy to get called, and since the trial was in Mount Pilot, her connection to Andy (law enforcement in another jurisdiction) might not be a problem

Happy Days - Howard is a gimme - a respectable local businessman. Not quite as sure about how Fonzie got called. Was he registered to vote? (this is well before “motor-voter” laws). No cause to exclude, I guess

Monk - come on! He’s an employee of the police department, for heaven’s sake. As soon as he mentions that, he’s out!

Murder She Wrote: Her personal connection to dozens of accused murderers and victims is probably an issue.

What do you all think? Am I on the right track, or am I misunderstanding the law?

Of course you’re right, but you’re confusing reality with the made up world of television sitcoms. It doesn’t have to make sense that Monk wouldn’t really end up on a jury. The writer simply thought it would make a good plot for a TV show, and that’s good enough for me.

Mystery fiction author Jessica Fletcher being in the vicinity of at least one murder averaging every two weeks for well over a decade should be a clue that she is up to no good. Her ability to gaslight innocent people into confessing suggests that she also had some command of mesmerism over investigators, and could use the same abilities to be welcomed onto or rejected from jury service as she desired.

As for police, lawyers, et cetera, they are not by default excluded from jury duty, and depending upon the type of trial may be accepted by both parties. The only default exclusion due to employment would be if they were part of the agency involved in a criminal investigation or worked for the court system.

Stranger

Yep, you are right here.

But they could be called for civil trials.

Thank you

Might a judge think her fame as a mystery writer would give her undue influence over the other jurors?

What you’re missing is voir dire, peremptory challenge, and strike for cause.

In the Simpsons ep “The Boy Who Knew Too Much,” every member of the jury is a main or supporting character (Homer, Patty, Skinner, etc.), so they all should have been disqualified for knowing one another socially. (Also, Apu should have been disqualified as a non-citizen.)

At some point, Apu went through the process and was naturalized.

In New Jersey they used to be exempt but that law changed a few decades ago. I’ve known many cops who have received jury notices but I have no personal knowledge of any that were picked. Even for civil trials.

To add to your list Picket Fences had an episode where a murder trial was moved to Rome WI on a change of venue. The sheriff was picked to be on the jury for the trial of a drug dealer who straight up murdered a cop. There was no accusation of impropriety on the part of the cop. The sheriff convinced the jury to acquit. It’s my theory that David E. Kelley eventually gets tired of his shows and makes the characters do more and more stupid, unlikely and out of character things just to piss off the audience and drive them away.

Yes - several seasons later.

Just thought I’d point out the actual show named Jury Duty:

We watched it. They have a few slapstick moments and silly pranks but, in general, it felt surprisingly authentic for a faked up reality show.

And, of course, the cinematic masterpiece of the same name:

Hey, it won an award! (Golden Raspberry for Worst Actor)

But seriously, wasn’t Adrian Monk a police consultant, rather than a direct employee of the department when he serves?

I think the Monk episode had him pissing off the judge so much with his OCD behaviors, and his reasons not to serve, that the judge saw to it he was seated. Or am I thinking of another show?

Oh well-- plot #752: the character doesn’t just serve on a jury-- it’s got to be some variation of 12 Angry Men.

The only exception I can think of is a show from about 20 years ago with 2 couples with small children. One of the mothers had to serve on a jury, and kept changing her vote in order to continue deliberations, because she was enjoying serving on a (sequestered!) jury away from her husband and kids.

Malcolm in the Middle had Lois on a jury, and eventually realizing that she was reacting to the suspect as if he were Francis (her most troublesome son)

Hmm-- next time I get to do the topic for TV binge, I think I’ll do “Jury Duty plots that did not reference 12 Angry Men.”

That disqualification is not automatic, but it is common for judges not to want to risk it and just let one go.

Other shows: Modern Family. (Jay kicked off for sucking up to Terry Bradshaw) (Gloria kicked off-different episode- for reasons I don’t recall.)

I have actually served on a jury with someone who was a friend and co-worker. No one asked, no one seemed to care that we acted as if we already knew each other.

Gloria wants to serve but is eliminated when she tells them she knows when someone is guilty.

I sat through a jury selection recently. Parties have rather less power on jury selection here, but anyway, it occurred to me after watching, that an ordinary case with a stupid and poor criminal, the weren’t going to spend much time on jury selection anyway.