Interestingly, I got a jury questionnaire for Federal Court (Eastern District of North Carolina) slightly over two years ago, and it was nowhere as invasive as this. A few relatively personal questions, but ones that would be obviously connected to jury selection (“Have you ever been convicted of a crime?”), but nothing like this inquisition.
What if you answered all of the questions honestly and thoroughly (including your license personalized license plate, the names ages & occupations of your family members, and the SCA chapter you attend) . . . and it turns out one of the two attorneys receiving the information is a Mob lawyer, and you’re charged with the decision of whether to send John A. Gotti to prison for the rest of his life? He does have an upcoming trial, apparently.
Does the questionnaire ask what you thought of Goodfellas?
Just trying to make you feel better. No, please, no thanks necessary.
I wonder what would happen if you wrote on the top of your questionaire “take me as whoever I am, or dismiss me.”
When I did jury duty I never had to fill out a questionnaire? That was about 5 years ago.
Well, I filled the questionnaire out to the best of my ability. Not being a lawyer I felt there was no way I could out lawyer them. Also, I’m not on medication, don’t have a vanity license plate or bumper stickers, and am pretty boring on paper.
Then I thought, “Hey, if there were ever a situation where the gay card came out as trumps this would be it.” —this being Alabama and all. So I carefully crafted the following statement in response to the “anything else?” question.
“I’m gay. This wouldn’t affect my objectivity, shouldn’t come up in conversation, and shouldn’t be relevant. However, I suspect it is nearly impossible in Alabama to impanel a jury of 12 people in which all other jurors would find this information irrelevant should the subject be breached.”
If the first two sentences don’t disqualify me, surely that last one will. Right?
FWIW, federal judges, in cooperation with the lawyers, craft their own questions. So the person to blame is the judge.
I think the point of these is to ask about verifiable information so people will feel they cannot lie. If you ask someone if stealing is bad, you cannot verify their internal thoughts. If you ask what bumper stickers they have on their car, people will feel compelled to answer honestly.
You would be swiftly dismissed to the local jail for one count of contempt.
I agree, that’s a particularly invasive and annoying jury questionnaire. Most aren’t nearly that bad.
Judges, lawyers and jury consultants may find meaning in the most innocuous bits of data. I used to know a judge who asked for a show of hands as to which jurors let their dogs and cats up on the furniture; he’d read a study in some criminal procedure journal suggesting that those who were lenient with their pets were also likely to be pro-criminal defendant. :rolleyes:
This is why jury selection is still an art and not a science.
But take any of those questions and put them in a business context, and you can call it market research and data mining.
You may be be a potential juror on an interesting case. I think some of the questions are intrusive also, but…
I would probably answer the questions truthfully, but as vaguely as possible – e.g.:
77) What websites do you regularly visit? “Google, Yahoo, etc…”
9) Are you taking any medications which by law must be prescribed by a physician? If yes, describe: “A small grey tablet and a white and orange capsule.”
List any hobbies, spare-time activities, outside interests: “I like baseball.”
While I agree some of the questions do seem overly invasive, I can’t get on board with the OP’s apparent desire to be quickly dismissed. At worst, jury duty is a free day off from work and a chance to catch up on some reading. At best (IMO), you’ll actually get to serve, which I did once and found to be a fascinating experience.
Not all employers pay their employees for jury duty. However, I’m unemployed by choice and am living off of my savings. When I was working for an employer who payed for jury duty, I felt much the same as you do. It’s easy when someone else is subsidizing your day off. I wonder if you would feel so magnanimous if it was a more immediate siphon off your finances.
I live a long way from the court, right on the cusp of qualifying for a subsidized motel room. Google maps chooses a route that is 78.7 miles. The shortest route would be 75 miles—but definitely not the best route. The best route would be 83.4 miles. The court will provide a room for anyone who would have to travel more than 80 miles. The potential juror must pre-qualify to be able to get a room. You know that when I try to qualify for a room that I’ll be denied as not meeting the criteria. So that means I have to travel 2 hours each way each day that I have to serve.
Then you will delighted to learn that federal jurors make the princely sum of $40 per day! Which, admittedly, is more than $0 per day.
I think the questions about the license plates and cars may have more to do with someone seeing you outside the courts and being able to identify you as a a juror, and being able to ask you questions. At least that is what I would have thought of first.
We got the bumper sticker question during voir dire for the federal jury process I just went through in SF. As it happens not a one of the 36 people interviewed had any - the judge wryly noted that that question seems to be getting increasingly obsolescent for a majority of the populace ( I guess bumper stickers are falling out of fashion ). Must be an old standard.
There were a number of “what are your hobbies”, “what are your favorite TV shows” -type questions, but nothing deeply invasive and nothing approaching 20 pages. More like two. The only pre-trial questionnaire we got concerned availability for a lengthy trial. That packet sounds a little over the top.
I called the court to ask if I was compelled to use the shortest route (75 miles) or if I could use my preferred route (83 miles). I asked whether I would qualify to get a motel room if I considered my preferred route, or if I could apply the mileage reimbursement to a room for which I would be responsible, or if I got a room having failed to meet the minimum mileage distance would I be merely compensated a smaller amount for the lesser miles I would be taking.
The answer? The question was made moot. I’m not supposed to report to that court; therefore I am excused. I had received a preliminary questionnaire in 2007. I sold my house in 2007. I received a second questionnaire just like the first at my current address earlier 2009. Finally I was mailed the detailed questionnaire late September. As best I can tell, this was all part of the same process. This district has 3 divisions. When I sold my house I moved between divisions. I’m guessing that the computer system’s data edits caught the move but failed to validate that I was in the same division. Should I be summoned again, I would report to a court that is about half the distance from this one.
I really would like to know what the answers were to my questions. I’d much rather get a room and pay the difference than drive the hour to and from the newly assigned court. Although I’d like to have the knowledge, I hope I won’t be finding out anytime soon.
On file with my ISP.
On file with my telephone service provider.
Not applicable.
On file with Nevada DMV.
Unable to provide response; I am not personally acquainted with 90+% of my family members.
On file with my physician.
Have:
any family member ever had drug or alcohol problem?
you received veteran’s, SS, welfare, AFDC, unemployment, education grant, etc. benefits?
you lived outside of this geographic area (list of states included)? if yes, where and when?
[/quote]
Unable to provide response; I am not personally acquainted with 90+% of my family members.
On file with VA, SSA, and other applicable entities.
On file with the USPS.
Not applicable.
Answering silly questionnaires.
No contempt issues there!
What if for every question you answered, “I respectfully decline to answer based on my sincere belief that I may tend to incriminate myself?”
Well, that probably would be better than answering each question with “Fuck off and die!”, which was my first response. 
My last jury call didn’t have a thing to ask, questionaire-wise. I was the first person bounced after questioning started, but I think that was more due to my saying that there were circumstances where I thought assault was justified.