A discussion with my friend Andrew prompted me to do a bit of research regarding jury selection in King County. I was explaining to him how I have been summoned for jury duty to both of the different courthouses in the county (Seattle and Kent), incidentally twice to each of them at this point. He pointed out that in his county there are two courthouses, one serving the east side of the county and one the west side of the county, but you only can get summoned to the side of the county in which you live.
Interesting, I thought. So today while I was wandering around online, I decided to do a bit of research and find out some answers. In fact, King County for many years since the construction of the Kent Regional Justice Center has drawn its jury pools for each of their courthouses from the entire county. However, in 2005 the Washington State Legislature enacted a law that allowed counties with multiple courthouses to divide their jury selection geographically among the courthouses. King County started doing this for a while in 2007, but then stopped after its constitutionality was challenged on the grounds that the state constitution guarantees a right to a jury trial comprised of jurors from the county, not PART of the county.
The State Supreme Court upheld the law in 2009, and since mid-2009 King County now summons its jurors based on geography, with two assignment areas. I couldn't find a reference to what specifically the boundaries of those areas are, but it appears to be based on zip code, primarily with those areas south of Seattle & I-90 in the Kent area, and within Seattle and north of I-90 in the Seattle area. Though they do claim to intend to adjust the boundaries based on census data, to ensure a fair and balanced representation of both juries. Seems reasonable.
What this means is, considering I now live on the northern border of the county, I should never be summoned to jury duty in Kent again. At least that should limit my options a bit. :) Though it should also save the court some money, as let me tell you, mileage from my house to Kent added up to about 62 miles round trip @ $0.55/mile = $34.10 + $10.00 = $44.10/day for serving jury duty. Of course, I actually donated that to the court's child care program, because it's a good thing. But still, that's far more money than they really need to spend to get qualified jurors.
Showing posts with label juryduty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label juryduty. Show all posts
Friday, March 26, 2010
Jury Duty - Episode IV - Conclusion
It was fortunate I was placed on such a short case. After starting jury service on Monday, my service was completed by Wednesday afternoon, after completing an entire case. A not-so-brief summary of the case follows:
In May 2009, a 1994 Plymouth Voyager minivan was stolen from an apartment complex in Federal Way around 3am. There were no witnesses to the crime, however a (fairly useless) security camera caught the vehicle driving away from the complex, along with another vehicle, around that time. No person was identifiable from the video.
Around 3pm that same afternoon, the minivan was waiting for the light to change at an intersection in downtown Kent. As is typical for a NW afternoon in May, rain was pouring down. A Kent police officer happened to pull up along the right side of the minivan at the same light, and noticed the van had a broken out passenger-side window, with shards of broken glass still remaining around the edge of the window, and rain streaming into the vehicle through it. The officer noticed one driver in the vehicle, who proceeded to look straight ahead and not look over to the police officer to his right. The officer found this itself somewhat odd, as "most people will turn to look at me when I pull up next to them, simply out of curiosity." After the light changed, she slowed and pulled up behind the van and began to follow him, while running the plates through the computer in her cruiser. To not much surprise, the plates turned up a stolen vehicle, which she verified with dispatch and alerted nearby officers who soon joined her.
She turned on her lights, and chirped her siren several times, instructing the van to pull over. Instead of pulling over, he continued driving forward to the approaching red light, where a car was stopped in the right lane waiting for the light to change. He proceeded to pull out to the inside lane, and without stopping executed a right turn around the stopped car and continued. The officer continued pursuit, at this point firing up the siren. Down the succeeding two-lane road, at a 4-way stop with another car stopped ahead of him at the stop sign, he proceeded to cut over into the oncoming lane around the stopped car, and run the stop sign, continuing down the street where he turned into a dead-end apartment complex. As he was approaching the dead end, officer still in pursuit, with the van slowing but still moving, he bailed out of the driver-side door and headed into a swampy area down a ravine on foot.
Other police units circled to the other side of the swampy area to cut him off, while the pursuing officer remained on the van-side of the swamp watching the suspect. He proceeded to surrender to the police on the opposite side, now wet up to above his knees and having lost his shoes in the swamp. He was taken into custody by the Kent police. An inspection of items on his person included a bottle of prescription pain killers belonging to the owner of the vehicle who testified that the pills were in his backpack that was in the vehicle when it was stolen.
The officers inspected and took pictures of the stolen minivan. A variety of items were strewn about the vehicle, including a screwdriver (which the vehicle's owner admitted to also having been in the backpack). The passenger window was busted in, and shattered glass was all over the area of the passenger seat, as well as plenty of water from the ensuing rainfall. The ignition had been punched out and was sitting on the floor between the driver and passenger seats, and the car had obviously been started using the screwdriver.
The defendant was charged with two counts: (1) Possession of a Stolen Vehicle, and (2) Attempting to Elude a Pursuing Police Vehicle.
Testimony came primarily from the victim (the owner of the vehicle) and the various police officers and detectives who had responded to the incident. The detective who interrogated the suspect shortly after the arrest asked him several questions, paraphrased:
Detective: "Where did you get the car?"
Suspect: "I got it from a friend."
D: "What's your friend's name?"
S: "I can't tell you."
D: "Did you know the car was stolen?"
S: "No."
D: "Why did you run from the police?"
S: "Because I had a warrant."
During the course of testimony, were were also made aware of a prior conviction for auto theft of a 1994 Plymouth Voyager minivan, similar method of starting using a screwdriver. The jury was provided limiting instructions as to this evidence, that it may only be considered to establish whether or not the defendant had knowledge that the vehicle was stolen.
Following the prosecution resting their case, the defense was provided as follows:
"The defense waives opening, and rests."
No defense was provided for the case. The question for the jury would be simply based on whether or not the State had proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt.
As to the first count, Possession of a Stolen Vehicle, the State needed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that:
(1) The defendant was in posession of the car.
(2) The defendant acted with the knowledge that the car was stolen.
The first was hard to argue with... he was caught in the vehicle... mostly. The officer was not able to positively identify him within the vehicle, other than a profile view. However, the officer could positively identify him in the swamp, and it is highly unlikely there was any sort of switcheroo pulled within the swamp itself. Additionally, the stolen pills that were identified as being contained within the vehicle, were found in the pocket of the defendant after arrest. 12 members of the jury were satisfied with this.
The second part was slightly more challenging. There was no concrete evidence that the defendant knew the car was stolen. Reasonable doubt had to be applied to consider whether a reasonable person who stepped into a car that had a busted out window, glass everywhere, a punched ignition, started by a screwdriver; would reasonably believe that the car was stolen. 11 jurors agreed that a reasonable person would, 1 juror was not satisfied. Not because he didn't believe the defendant was guilty, but more that he didn't believe the prosecutor fully proved its case. It seemed to the 11 of us in agreement that the 1 juror didn't have a firm grasp of "reasonable doubt". After about an hour of "discussion", said juror finally agreed that he was probably over analyzing the jury instructions provided, and agreed that the defendant was guilty.
Moving on to count 2, Attempting to Elude a Pursuing Police Vehicle, the State needed to establish a bit more:
(1) The defendant was in control of the vehicle.
(2) The police were identifiable as police.
(3) The police signaled the defendant to stop, either visually, verbally, or with siren or some other hand gesture.
(4) That the defendant, in an attempt to elude, was driving in a reckless manner.
The first 3 were fairly well-established. The only question was the matter of whether his actions constituted "driving in a reckless manner", of which on initial deliberation the jury was divided 8-4. In this case, his actions were fairly well established, including the aforementioned illegal maneuvers, running lights and stop signs, and abandoning a moving vehicle; but it was up to the jury to determine if that indeed met the level of recklessness. If not, we were also given the option of finding the defendant guilty of the lesser included charge of "Failure to Obey a Police Officer". After a fair bit of deliberation, it was the jury's consensus that any one of his illegal maneuvers individually would probably not have constituted recklessness. But the compounding of his multiple behaviors during the pursuit did meet the standard of driving in a reckless manner.
After a total of 2 hours of deliberations, the defendant was found guilty on both counts.
It took about an hour for the court to be reassembled (while in deliberations in the jury room, the court had already begun voir dire on another case, with different jurors and different counsel). The defendant and both counsel were brought into the courtroom, and the jury returned where the verdict was given to the judge who gave it to the clerk to be read. The clerk then polled each individual juror: "Juror Number 1: Is this your verdict? ("Yes") Is this the verdict of the jury? ("Yes")..." The jury was dismissed to return to the jury room while the courtroom was cleared. (Throughout the entire trial, we were never present when the defendant was brought in or taken out of the courtroom. Our only indication he was in custody was the King County Jailer who was always present in the corner of the room whenever the defendant was present.)
Following the case, the judge stopped into the jury room to thank us for our time and service and asked if we had any questions about the case. This was the only time we had been addressed by anyone other than the court bailiff outside of the recorded proceedings of the courtroom. Following that we went out into the cleared courtroom where both the prosecutor and defense attorney were still packing up their things, and most of the jurors spent about a half hour just talking with the attorneys about the case. We were curious what we weren't told about the case, specifically about the prior convictions of the defendant. In fact, the defense attorney told us he had about 8 prior convictions for auto theft, 6 of which were concerning the exact same year and model of car that he was convicted of in this case. At the age of nearly 23, they figured he's been out of jail for a total of about 6 months since he was 18. He was not exactly a model citizen. We were curious why the defense didn't present any case, and the defender goes "I had nothing!" Apparently they had tried to get the defendant to take a plea, but he refused and wanted his day in court. The defender told him "there's no way you're getting off on this one", and he was obviously right. His only question to us was "what took you so long?! I thought you'd be done in 20 minutes." It was very interesting, both for us the jurors and for them the lawyers. The prosecutor had mentioned that this is the most he has ever had a jury want to talk to him, and we were definitely the most interested about things after the case had been done. Apparently most jurors just want to get their job done and get out. We offered them both some tips that might help them in future cases. (We all want a fair trial, of course, but if the bad guy's guilty, a little help getting the conviction doesn't hurt.)
And so it goes. Jury Duty experience #4. Will next time be next year, or 20 years from now? Hard to say, but if past experience is any indication, it won't be too long until my next summons.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Jury Duty - Episode IV - Part 5
No updates the last day or so as it's been not much more than sitting in the courtroom and hearing the case. It's now Wednesday at lunch, and after lunch we will begin deliberations. We'll see how long that takes... but all hopes are that we'll wrap things up this afternoon and be off the hook for tomorrow. At which point a lengthier blog about the case can commence.
Stay tuned for the exciting conclusion... coming up next!
Stay tuned for the exciting conclusion... coming up next!
Monday, March 22, 2010
Jury Duty - Episode IV - Part 4
Home at last, and after a long, restful nap, I'll provide an update from the rest of the day.
When we last left our story, I had been selected for a prospective jury, my designation 11 of 40. While I am now bound by a standard prohibition from disclosing any details about the case until it's over, I can still give you a bit about the process up to this point, and say that this is a criminal case, with an expected duration of less than a week.
The bailiff assembled us in numerical order (we were proud of our ability to handle that), then led us into the courtroom. After providing us some brief details about the type of case we would be hearing, and the anticipated length of time, the judge asked for those with any undue hardships that would prevent them from fulfilling their jury service to raise their numbers. Then one by one she asked each to explain his or her hardship, some of which were more hardships than others, but after all was said and done, most of the 10 or so who requested excusal were indeed excused from service.
Voir dire commenced, and both the prosecution and defense had 20 minutes to question the jury. I was asked no questions by either the prosecutor nor the defense attorney. Now, they both had a copy of my juror bio form, which had standard information such as name, age, education, and occupation. Perhaps something on that made me either very easy to accept, or very easy to challenge. But the day was over, so we are now returning to the courtroom at 9am tomorrow morning, where voir dire will complete, and we'll be whittled down to just the 12 + an alternate in the jury. I may be in it, or I may be returned to the jury pool to start the process all over again. We'll find out tomorrow.
When we last left our story, I had been selected for a prospective jury, my designation 11 of 40. While I am now bound by a standard prohibition from disclosing any details about the case until it's over, I can still give you a bit about the process up to this point, and say that this is a criminal case, with an expected duration of less than a week.
The bailiff assembled us in numerical order (we were proud of our ability to handle that), then led us into the courtroom. After providing us some brief details about the type of case we would be hearing, and the anticipated length of time, the judge asked for those with any undue hardships that would prevent them from fulfilling their jury service to raise their numbers. Then one by one she asked each to explain his or her hardship, some of which were more hardships than others, but after all was said and done, most of the 10 or so who requested excusal were indeed excused from service.
Voir dire commenced, and both the prosecution and defense had 20 minutes to question the jury. I was asked no questions by either the prosecutor nor the defense attorney. Now, they both had a copy of my juror bio form, which had standard information such as name, age, education, and occupation. Perhaps something on that made me either very easy to accept, or very easy to challenge. But the day was over, so we are now returning to the courtroom at 9am tomorrow morning, where voir dire will complete, and we'll be whittled down to just the 12 + an alternate in the jury. I may be in it, or I may be returned to the jury pool to start the process all over again. We'll find out tomorrow.
Jury Duty - Episode IV - Part 3
11:35am - Another jury panel, this time of 45 potential jurors. Again, it's an honor not to be selected. Or is it?
You know, for as often as I get "randomly selected" to get jury duty, it's becoming exceedingly rare that I actually get "randomly selected" for a jury panel once I'm here. I guess it's not the worst in the world, because it usually means I sit around for a couple of days then go home. However, those two days are incredibly boring.
11:45am - Lunch break until 1:30pm. An hour and 45 minutes. THIS is why the government is so slow people. Honestly, who takes that long of a lunch in the real world? I'm lucky to take a half-hour let alone an hour and a half. If they spent less time taking lunch, maybe we could leave by like 3:00pm or something. Yeah, that's the ticket.
1:15pm - Back from lunch, though had to wait a good 15 minutes to get through the metal detectors at the front door.
1:48pm - Still sitting here waiting for something to happen. Ooohhh, an update! One more panel to choose... 40 more names to be selected. 10 down... #11 is me. Well, time to see what the excitement will happen. It's usually not a good sign if you're in the first half of the panel... that means you pretty much have to get challenged off the jury in order not to serve. Woe is me. At least I'm doing something! More to come later...
You know, for as often as I get "randomly selected" to get jury duty, it's becoming exceedingly rare that I actually get "randomly selected" for a jury panel once I'm here. I guess it's not the worst in the world, because it usually means I sit around for a couple of days then go home. However, those two days are incredibly boring.
11:45am - Lunch break until 1:30pm. An hour and 45 minutes. THIS is why the government is so slow people. Honestly, who takes that long of a lunch in the real world? I'm lucky to take a half-hour let alone an hour and a half. If they spent less time taking lunch, maybe we could leave by like 3:00pm or something. Yeah, that's the ticket.
1:15pm - Back from lunch, though had to wait a good 15 minutes to get through the metal detectors at the front door.
1:48pm - Still sitting here waiting for something to happen. Ooohhh, an update! One more panel to choose... 40 more names to be selected. 10 down... #11 is me. Well, time to see what the excitement will happen. It's usually not a good sign if you're in the first half of the panel... that means you pretty much have to get challenged off the jury in order not to serve. Woe is me. At least I'm doing something! More to come later...
Jury Duty - Episode IV - Part 2
9:40am - First Jury Panel called... will I be selected? Panel of 37... 10 down... 20 down... 30 down... 37 down. It's an honor not to be selected.
10:05am - Break time. 20 minutes to get out of the room, but why bother?
Hurry up and wait...
10:05am - Break time. 20 minutes to get out of the room, but why bother?
Hurry up and wait...
Jury Duty - Episode IV
There's something wrong when your blog has a whole category dedicated to "juryduty". This week is my first adventure for the King County Superior Court in Seattle (though I've done KCSC in Kent twice, as well as Seattle Municipal Court once). That's not to say I haven't been summoned for this court before, that just happened to be the one I got out of because I had already served recently. So that makes this Jury Service #4, out of 5 summons in 5 years.
Annoyance number one: reporting time is 8am. Of course, I had the privilege of taking public transportation... though getting to the courthouse is fantastically easy. One bus from door to door is as convenient as things can be, makes me want to work downtown so it could be so simple. Alas, I think this will be the extent of my use of the #77 North City/Maple Leaf Express. Now, the annoyance isn't the reporting time itself, 8am is perfectly reasonable, but that means I showed up, along with probably 70% of the jurors, around 7:45am or so. Of course, nothing actually starts until at least 8:30am, to make up for the 30% of people who can't manage to show up on time. So WHY DO I BOTHER SHOWING UP EARLY?! Oh yes, I know... for one of the coveted "good seats" in the Jury Assembly Room. The ones against the wall, near a power outlet, are most precious. Very important. Anyway...
We had the obligatory visit from one of the judges, who read his prepared statement regarding how important Jury Duty is. And now are watching the fantastic "How to be a Juror" video, which I've seen so many times I don't really pay attention. One old guy is snoring loudly on the other side of the room (that's how I know he's snoring loudly.)
It is now about 9am. No indication yet as to what the docket looks like for today. Maybe this will be a mercifully slow day in the court. Though somehow I doubt it... I can't be so lucky too many times. Then again, I'm "lucky" enough to get selected 5 times in 5 years, so maybe I can.
More updates throughout the day...
Annoyance number one: reporting time is 8am. Of course, I had the privilege of taking public transportation... though getting to the courthouse is fantastically easy. One bus from door to door is as convenient as things can be, makes me want to work downtown so it could be so simple. Alas, I think this will be the extent of my use of the #77 North City/Maple Leaf Express. Now, the annoyance isn't the reporting time itself, 8am is perfectly reasonable, but that means I showed up, along with probably 70% of the jurors, around 7:45am or so. Of course, nothing actually starts until at least 8:30am, to make up for the 30% of people who can't manage to show up on time. So WHY DO I BOTHER SHOWING UP EARLY?! Oh yes, I know... for one of the coveted "good seats" in the Jury Assembly Room. The ones against the wall, near a power outlet, are most precious. Very important. Anyway...
We had the obligatory visit from one of the judges, who read his prepared statement regarding how important Jury Duty is. And now are watching the fantastic "How to be a Juror" video, which I've seen so many times I don't really pay attention. One old guy is snoring loudly on the other side of the room (that's how I know he's snoring loudly.)
It is now about 9am. No indication yet as to what the docket looks like for today. Maybe this will be a mercifully slow day in the court. Though somehow I doubt it... I can't be so lucky too many times. Then again, I'm "lucky" enough to get selected 5 times in 5 years, so maybe I can.
More updates throughout the day...
Friday, February 05, 2010
Seriously? Again?
Home from work, time to check the mail. What do I find? That's right, ANOTHER Jury Summons. This is the 5th I've had in the past 5 years. I excused one of them because it came so close together, but good ole King County now excuses if you've served not in the past 2 years, but in the past 12 months. When was my last jury service? 13 months ago. At least this time it's King County downtown and not in Kent like last time. Oh well.
I should play the lottery... just "randomly" select the winning numbers for me, please. :)
I should play the lottery... just "randomly" select the winning numbers for me, please. :)
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Jury Duty - Done
To finalize the uneventful story, after another hour of waiting, by around 2:45pm, just as I expected, the final case of the day was not needing a jury, so we were all happily dismissed and thanked for our service (in my case, two days sitting in the room).
If I had anything interesting to add, I would. But alas, I'm more just tired from sitting around the past two days. Well, tomorrow we're back to normal. Thank goodness.
Jury Duty - Day 2
9:30am - We're still waiting in the jury room to be called up to the courtroom. I have this suspicious feeling that it will be a long long day today.
9:33am - No sooner have I written the last update as we're informed that they issued a continuance on the case, eliminated the need for a jury at this time and we're all back in the general jury pool again. That being the case, this might be a long and boring day today afterall. I can now say that the "very directed questions" on the supplemental jury questionnaire all related to history / experiences with child molestation with strong indications that a long trial might ensue. We'll see what new and improved cases are left on the docket today.
10:00am - And here we continue to sit. Oh the excitement. No announcement yet though just by nature of me saying that I'm sure we'll hear something in the next minute or so.
10:55am - The natives are getting restless. No new news since the break so we're all still sitting around. Though it is becoming a little more active around here. The gentlemen behind me are swapping old jury stories... just like swapping old war stories but with far less death and destruction. I proceeded to do as much work as I could from here, which mainly consisted of following up on email. I wish something would happen too. I left my laptop in the car this morning, expecting to at least be sitting in court all day. Perhaps I'll fetch it at lunch. My iPhone's battery may not hold up all afternoon anyway.
9:33am - No sooner have I written the last update as we're informed that they issued a continuance on the case, eliminated the need for a jury at this time and we're all back in the general jury pool again. That being the case, this might be a long and boring day today afterall. I can now say that the "very directed questions" on the supplemental jury questionnaire all related to history / experiences with child molestation with strong indications that a long trial might ensue. We'll see what new and improved cases are left on the docket today.
10:00am - And here we continue to sit. Oh the excitement. No announcement yet though just by nature of me saying that I'm sure we'll hear something in the next minute or so.
10:55am - The natives are getting restless. No new news since the break so we're all still sitting around. Though it is becoming a little more active around here. The gentlemen behind me are swapping old jury stories... just like swapping old war stories but with far less death and destruction. I proceeded to do as much work as I could from here, which mainly consisted of following up on email. I wish something would happen too. I left my laptop in the car this morning, expecting to at least be sitting in court all day. Perhaps I'll fetch it at lunch. My iPhone's battery may not hold up all afternoon anyway.
11:30am - Two cases left on the jury docket today. They thought they'd be ready to call juries before lunch, but now the wheels of justice have turned so slowly that's no longer the case. So we're out to lunch until 1:30pm. Fully expecting that at 1:30pm we'll have at least one jury list called, and hopefully I'm not selected. :)
12:30pm - Went across the street to get some lunch at Chipotle, stopped by my car and picked up the laptop bag, and now I'm relaxing in a very empty jury assembly room working. It is now I commentate on the privilege of excercising my civic duty. If only I weren't so busy, I would have no problem at all being on jury duty. In fact, usually I'm not so busy that I can't take a few days to do it every couple of years. But in fact, this time it's not the best time at work to not be there, and it's busy. But my being here is necessary to make sure the system works fairly and as it was designed to in the Constitution. If everyone who had to work avoided it, we'd have juries of the unemployed and retired deciding cases, and if I were the accused, that sure wouldn't sound like an impartial jury of my peers. But is it wrong of me to hope, just a little, that I don't get selected for a jury this time around? That my mere presence in the jury selection pool is upholding my Constitutional mandate? Is it indeed an honor NOT to be selected? We'll see.
1:35pm - Back from lunch, no news is good news? No announcements, save the lady sitting next to me repeatedly popping her gum and making noise with her little handheld sudoku game. Do these things not have sound-off switches?! I digress... waiting for more news of the final 2 jury panels. Oops, a bailiff just walked in delivering something, that's not a good sign. And here comes the jury clerk to make the announcement... 35 names this time. 5 names down, 10 names down, 15 names down, 25 names down, 30 down, 35 down! Not me! Dodged another one! One jury panel left to be called, "sometime this afternoon." All I need is for this to get delayed at least until tomorrow, and it becomes someone else's problem. Tick tick tick.
Monday, February 02, 2009
Jury Duty - Update 2
1:30pm - back from lunch and immediately they're ready to call the next juror pool, 50 names this time. 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 names called and I dodged the bullet again. Yes! Sounds like that should be the last for the day.
2:30 - The 50 are finally heading out the door, but wait there's more. They have one more case with 50 more jurors. Shoot. Well, that makes 164 names for the day, and I hardly think I can dodge the last 50. 10 names down, 20 names down, 25 down, maybe I have a chance of avoiding it again! Nope, juror #26 out of 50. The 50 seems strongly to imply that this will be a criminal case of some sort, in fact, we get a special extra questionnaire form to fill out for this trial. Now, I shant make any comments regarding the nature of said questions until after I serve my jury time, however, let's just say the questions were all of a similar nature lending strongly to the subject of the case that we may be a part of. But fortunately, after collecting said forms, we're informed that they will need time to review them, and we were all dismissed until Tuesday. We can only assume that on Tuesday we'll have quite the voir dire to whittle us down to what I presume will be 12 jurors + 2 alternates. If my calculations are correct, only 12 people need to be challenged out ahead of me in line for me to move into the top 14. Unless of course, I can be challenged out of the pool, THAT would be stellar. But I wouldn't count on it. The problem also is that it sure sounds like this trial will last more than a couple of days, which could be a mess. Oh well, until tomorrow morning.
Jury Duty - The next adventure
You know what's sad? When you have jury duty so many times that your blog has it's own category for it. Welcome to my world. Mildly senimental having this jury duty at the same place I had it the very first time. Furthermore the wifi Internet access here is just as terribly unreliable as it was 4 years ago. So this blog post is courtesy of my iPhone and the oddly more reliable wireless network.
Here in Kent it's pretty boring, also as it was last time. We apparently have 3 cases on the docket today and that bodes well for abou half of the 200 or so jurors sitting around me. As it works out, about 10am they called 2 case pools of 34 and 30 jurors each. I'm 0/64 so far. But I am still here hoping that perhaps they'll soon call the third group then send the rest of us home for the day. That would be nice. Of course either way could be a win if I'm lucky. Luck isn't usually on my side.
Here in Kent it's pretty boring, also as it was last time. We apparently have 3 cases on the docket today and that bodes well for abou half of the 200 or so jurors sitting around me. As it works out, about 10am they called 2 case pools of 34 and 30 jurors each. I'm 0/64 so far. But I am still here hoping that perhaps they'll soon call the third group then send the rest of us home for the day. That would be nice. Of course either way could be a win if I'm lucky. Luck isn't usually on my side.
11:10am - No more cases before lunch. We're released now until 1:30. 2.5 hours, I think I'll just relax a bit and do some shopping at Kent Station and maybe find some lunch. More updates later.
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Beyond a reasonable doubt
Well, as you may or may not have inferred from my abrupt lack of blogging, shortly after my previous blog I was summoned for a jury panel. The following will be a not-so-brief recap of my jury experience.
15 names were called, including my own. We followed the bailiff down to the courtroom where we were led in in order, I was juror #9. We were introduced to the judge, the prosecutor, and the defense attorney, then Voir Dire began. They needed to turn these 15 potential jurors into 6 that would be on the trial. The judge rattled off her series of simple, obviously well-recycled questions regarding if any jurors knew anyone in the courtroom, had any problems being on a jury, had ever served on a jury before, etc. Nothing too alarming there. Then the prosecutor began with his questions, which took a swift turn towards any jurors who were involved or had a close family member involved in domestic violence. Suddenly we knew where this case was headed... or so we thought. I tended not to have much of a reason to raise my hand for any of the questions, until the question came "who enjoys lawyer shows on TV?" Well now we're talking, several of us raised our hands, to which I was questioned
"Mr. Roberts, what's your favorite lawyer show?"
"I enjoy the original Law and Order."
"Why do you like it?"
I didn't have a really good answer for this, but said "I like it for the characters".
The questions moved on to other people, but several additional times, questions came back to me about Law and Order.
"Mr. Roberts, do you think Law and Order is an accurate portrayal?"
"Haha, absolutely not, I think it's highly exaggerated."
"How so?"
"I don't think there can possibly be that much drama in the real world."
"So you won't be dissapointed if during my closing arguments there's no thrilling music?"
"No, I don't think so."
The prosecutor looked like a nice guy, though from the way he was stumbling through things, I think he knew what he was doing, but couldn't have been with the city prosecutors office for a terribly long time. Then, however, we moved on to the defense attorney.
Now I have to admit, looking at this guy, he looked like a cross between a used-car salesman and Donald Trump. I thought to myself this guy looks like a slimy, sleazy defense attorney like you see on TV. Of course, this was all on first impression -- I later came to find out that my first impression was 100% on the button.
Despite this impression, it took me just a few moments to realize--after noticing that after receiving the list of potential juror names probably just 10 minutes prior he had already memorized the names of all 15 jurors and would proceed to call each of us by name--that he was astoundingly good at what he did, and that the prosecutor was sorely outmatched. The defender asked his barrage of questions to the juror panel, but it quickly became apparent that he was really targetting the women on the panel trying to determine exactly which ones would be sympathetic to the victim and thus he wanted to dismiss from the jury. You really do notice by the pattern of questions the attorneys ask what they are looking for (both in jurors they want, and in jurors they don't want). I guess that's the point, but I never realized it would be so obvious.
After the questioning was over, the judge asked for challenges for cause, of which there were none. Then the attorneys sidebarred with the judge to request their peremptory challenges, where they can eliminate any jurors they wish for no reason whatsoever. Now, the first 6 jurors would carryover to the trial, and I was juror #9. So presuming I was not eliminated, if any 3 jurors above me were eliminated I would be on the jury. Seeing the preponderance of women at the top and the line of questioning, I was fairly certain I would be bumped up, unless I said something one of the attorneys didn't like. Sure enough, the judge listed off the 6 jurors who would be on the case, jurors 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10.
Without much ado, the other jurors returned to the pool, and the 6 of us took our seats in the jury box and the case began. This was the first we would hear the actual details of what this case was all about... the bizarreness of which we never would have expected.
The finer details of the case I will spare you, mainly because they are vastly irrelevant. But in summary, this crime was "violation of a no-contact order". The scene of the crime: the very courtroom where we were sitting, 4 months earlier. Apparently the defendant was in court for a similar violation brought on by his ex-wife. Immediately following the judges determination of "not guilty", he allegedly turned around toward his ex-wife sitting in the gallery and mouthed some not-so-nice words to her. If true, this would be a violation of the no-contact order between he and his ex-wife, which indeed was the question we were asked to consider.
Witnesses came forth, the prosecution attempted to prove a case based around inconsistent witness accounts, and just a lack of anything that could substantially prove the charge. Throughout the defense really didn't add much information in defense, but obfuscation was the order of the day. In later discussions with my fellow jurors, none of us really were swayed by this mess of confusion the defense was trying to cause, but I think it made him feel like he was doing something right.
Ultimately, after hearing the evidence and the arguments by the attorneys, we proceeded to deliberation. As much as I made it sound like there was no evidence, it wasn't quite as cut and dry as that. I think all 6 of us were doubtful who to believe, but I know as for myself, I came to the conclusion that I was pretty sure the defendant did what he was accused of... but there was definite doubt in my mind, enough so I couldn't reasonably consider him guilty of said crime. The one thing that was for certain to me was that this case was a collossal waste of the court's time, that probably never should have gone to trial. It wasn't a blatant disregard for the no-contact order, even if he did do what he was accused of... though the law may have dictated otherwise.
Regardless, it was definitely an interesting experience. I actually enjoyed it, but quickly realized that it was far more work than actually being at work. That's probably the one thing I wasn't expecting. It didn't feel like a waste of my time--quite the opposite, in fact, all 6 of us on the jury left making similar comments: everyone should serve on a jury, it's a valuable experience. Too bad the system tends to pick the same people over and over.
15 names were called, including my own. We followed the bailiff down to the courtroom where we were led in in order, I was juror #9. We were introduced to the judge, the prosecutor, and the defense attorney, then Voir Dire began. They needed to turn these 15 potential jurors into 6 that would be on the trial. The judge rattled off her series of simple, obviously well-recycled questions regarding if any jurors knew anyone in the courtroom, had any problems being on a jury, had ever served on a jury before, etc. Nothing too alarming there. Then the prosecutor began with his questions, which took a swift turn towards any jurors who were involved or had a close family member involved in domestic violence. Suddenly we knew where this case was headed... or so we thought. I tended not to have much of a reason to raise my hand for any of the questions, until the question came "who enjoys lawyer shows on TV?" Well now we're talking, several of us raised our hands, to which I was questioned
"Mr. Roberts, what's your favorite lawyer show?"
"I enjoy the original Law and Order."
"Why do you like it?"
I didn't have a really good answer for this, but said "I like it for the characters".
The questions moved on to other people, but several additional times, questions came back to me about Law and Order.
"Mr. Roberts, do you think Law and Order is an accurate portrayal?"
"Haha, absolutely not, I think it's highly exaggerated."
"How so?"
"I don't think there can possibly be that much drama in the real world."
"So you won't be dissapointed if during my closing arguments there's no thrilling music?"
"No, I don't think so."
The prosecutor looked like a nice guy, though from the way he was stumbling through things, I think he knew what he was doing, but couldn't have been with the city prosecutors office for a terribly long time. Then, however, we moved on to the defense attorney.
Now I have to admit, looking at this guy, he looked like a cross between a used-car salesman and Donald Trump. I thought to myself this guy looks like a slimy, sleazy defense attorney like you see on TV. Of course, this was all on first impression -- I later came to find out that my first impression was 100% on the button.
Despite this impression, it took me just a few moments to realize--after noticing that after receiving the list of potential juror names probably just 10 minutes prior he had already memorized the names of all 15 jurors and would proceed to call each of us by name--that he was astoundingly good at what he did, and that the prosecutor was sorely outmatched. The defender asked his barrage of questions to the juror panel, but it quickly became apparent that he was really targetting the women on the panel trying to determine exactly which ones would be sympathetic to the victim and thus he wanted to dismiss from the jury. You really do notice by the pattern of questions the attorneys ask what they are looking for (both in jurors they want, and in jurors they don't want). I guess that's the point, but I never realized it would be so obvious.
After the questioning was over, the judge asked for challenges for cause, of which there were none. Then the attorneys sidebarred with the judge to request their peremptory challenges, where they can eliminate any jurors they wish for no reason whatsoever. Now, the first 6 jurors would carryover to the trial, and I was juror #9. So presuming I was not eliminated, if any 3 jurors above me were eliminated I would be on the jury. Seeing the preponderance of women at the top and the line of questioning, I was fairly certain I would be bumped up, unless I said something one of the attorneys didn't like. Sure enough, the judge listed off the 6 jurors who would be on the case, jurors 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10.
Without much ado, the other jurors returned to the pool, and the 6 of us took our seats in the jury box and the case began. This was the first we would hear the actual details of what this case was all about... the bizarreness of which we never would have expected.
The finer details of the case I will spare you, mainly because they are vastly irrelevant. But in summary, this crime was "violation of a no-contact order". The scene of the crime: the very courtroom where we were sitting, 4 months earlier. Apparently the defendant was in court for a similar violation brought on by his ex-wife. Immediately following the judges determination of "not guilty", he allegedly turned around toward his ex-wife sitting in the gallery and mouthed some not-so-nice words to her. If true, this would be a violation of the no-contact order between he and his ex-wife, which indeed was the question we were asked to consider.
Witnesses came forth, the prosecution attempted to prove a case based around inconsistent witness accounts, and just a lack of anything that could substantially prove the charge. Throughout the defense really didn't add much information in defense, but obfuscation was the order of the day. In later discussions with my fellow jurors, none of us really were swayed by this mess of confusion the defense was trying to cause, but I think it made him feel like he was doing something right.
Ultimately, after hearing the evidence and the arguments by the attorneys, we proceeded to deliberation. As much as I made it sound like there was no evidence, it wasn't quite as cut and dry as that. I think all 6 of us were doubtful who to believe, but I know as for myself, I came to the conclusion that I was pretty sure the defendant did what he was accused of... but there was definite doubt in my mind, enough so I couldn't reasonably consider him guilty of said crime. The one thing that was for certain to me was that this case was a collossal waste of the court's time, that probably never should have gone to trial. It wasn't a blatant disregard for the no-contact order, even if he did do what he was accused of... though the law may have dictated otherwise.
Regardless, it was definitely an interesting experience. I actually enjoyed it, but quickly realized that it was far more work than actually being at work. That's probably the one thing I wasn't expecting. It didn't feel like a waste of my time--quite the opposite, in fact, all 6 of us on the jury left making similar comments: everyone should serve on a jury, it's a valuable experience. Too bad the system tends to pick the same people over and over.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Upholding the Constitution... again...
Yes, that's right, through the miracle of random selection, I have jury duty once again. It astounds me what the odds of such a thing happening to me just a year after the last time I did it, while other people seemingly never get selected... perhaps I'm just the lucky one.
In any event, this time I'm visiting the Seattle Municipal Court here in downtown Seattle. After my last jury service with King County down in Kent last year, I've been consistently claiming that jurors are treated like royalty because nobody wants to do it, and once they are here nobody wants to be here. Well in Seattle I must say it's no exception. I'm sitting here in the SMC Jury Assembly Room on the 12th floor (that's the top floor by the way, the jurors get the penthouse suite here) on 5th and Cherry. Huge floor to ceiling windows looking out South, West and North (not East, but really, who wants to look East from here anyway)-- some people would pay money to get a view this good. This building has to be one of the newer buildings around here, looking out the window I can see the much older King County jail and courthouse. We also have our own private outdoor terrace, and uh... well, we better enjoy it because for the next 3 days I'll be stuck here. :) Fortunately I have wireless internet access that does a splendid job of letting me pretend to be productive while away from work.
This morning has been so far uneventful... I haven't counted, nor are my powers of estimation very accurate, but I'd say there's probably 100 or so jurors serving this week. So far no jurors have been needed, so we're all still here waiting around. We can take a 15 minute break and leave whenever we want to... this building is right next to the Columbia Center (for those who aren't well versed, that would be the tallest building in Seattle, and the tallest building by number of floors [76] west of the Mississippi), so there should be plenty of interesting stuff around. Oops, I spoke too soon, they just called the first batch of 15... however I was not selected, so back to blogging. Lunch is from 12-1:30, I think I might take a walk down to Westlake Center (only 9 blocks or so), because the latch on my watch broke this morning and I need to get a new one. I know there's a Fossil store down there and hey, it's probably time to get a new watch anyway, I've only had this one for about 7 years or so.
I'm surprised they don't have a Starbucks stand in the jury room, that would be very Seattle of them. More updates later.
In any event, this time I'm visiting the Seattle Municipal Court here in downtown Seattle. After my last jury service with King County down in Kent last year, I've been consistently claiming that jurors are treated like royalty because nobody wants to do it, and once they are here nobody wants to be here. Well in Seattle I must say it's no exception. I'm sitting here in the SMC Jury Assembly Room on the 12th floor (that's the top floor by the way, the jurors get the penthouse suite here) on 5th and Cherry. Huge floor to ceiling windows looking out South, West and North (not East, but really, who wants to look East from here anyway)-- some people would pay money to get a view this good. This building has to be one of the newer buildings around here, looking out the window I can see the much older King County jail and courthouse. We also have our own private outdoor terrace, and uh... well, we better enjoy it because for the next 3 days I'll be stuck here. :) Fortunately I have wireless internet access that does a splendid job of letting me pretend to be productive while away from work.
This morning has been so far uneventful... I haven't counted, nor are my powers of estimation very accurate, but I'd say there's probably 100 or so jurors serving this week. So far no jurors have been needed, so we're all still here waiting around. We can take a 15 minute break and leave whenever we want to... this building is right next to the Columbia Center (for those who aren't well versed, that would be the tallest building in Seattle, and the tallest building by number of floors [76] west of the Mississippi), so there should be plenty of interesting stuff around. Oops, I spoke too soon, they just called the first batch of 15... however I was not selected, so back to blogging. Lunch is from 12-1:30, I think I might take a walk down to Westlake Center (only 9 blocks or so), because the latch on my watch broke this morning and I need to get a new one. I know there's a Fossil store down there and hey, it's probably time to get a new watch anyway, I've only had this one for about 7 years or so.
I'm surprised they don't have a Starbucks stand in the jury room, that would be very Seattle of them. More updates later.
Thursday, December 08, 2005
Episode II: The Phantom Jury
Another day of jury duty, waiting to be called... the wheels of justice turn slowly apparently.
8:30am - I arrived and checked in, and took an obligatory seat in the jury assembly room. Today I got here plenty early, and got a nice table to work at over in the corner. Much easier than sitting with your laptop on your lap. It's decidedly more empty in here today, maybe removing those 40 folks from yesterday made a difference. As I count the number of people in the room I'm in... 37. There's probably slightly more in the other room, and a few more in the lobby. So yeah, I'd estimate at least 100 folks around here today waiting for their chance to serve (or more likely, sitting around hoping they're not called so they can go home for good at the end of the day).
9:15am - First announcement of the morning. 4 cases on the docket today with potential juries. Nothing as of yet, so more to come. I'll continue to sit here wasting time finding things to do online.
10:30am - Still nothing. We had an "official" jury break... but still no news. In one of the rooms they started a movie on the TVs, I guess it was good... I was already sitting in the "quiet" room and didn't feel like moving from my excellent seat. :)
11:15am - Finally some word. Of the 4 cases scheduled today, 3 of them have settled or otherwise been dismissed. That leaves only 1 jury remaining for the day, and we've got way too many people for that. So 50 people are selected to be excused with thanks for their service. My name is called, and I'm done.
And that was the story of my jury duty experience. I guess it wasn't a total waste of time... though it's hard not to think that when I spent two days doing nothing short of sitting around doing nothing. Oh well. At least I've served my time until next time.
8:30am - I arrived and checked in, and took an obligatory seat in the jury assembly room. Today I got here plenty early, and got a nice table to work at over in the corner. Much easier than sitting with your laptop on your lap. It's decidedly more empty in here today, maybe removing those 40 folks from yesterday made a difference. As I count the number of people in the room I'm in... 37. There's probably slightly more in the other room, and a few more in the lobby. So yeah, I'd estimate at least 100 folks around here today waiting for their chance to serve (or more likely, sitting around hoping they're not called so they can go home for good at the end of the day).
9:15am - First announcement of the morning. 4 cases on the docket today with potential juries. Nothing as of yet, so more to come. I'll continue to sit here wasting time finding things to do online.
10:30am - Still nothing. We had an "official" jury break... but still no news. In one of the rooms they started a movie on the TVs, I guess it was good... I was already sitting in the "quiet" room and didn't feel like moving from my excellent seat. :)
11:15am - Finally some word. Of the 4 cases scheduled today, 3 of them have settled or otherwise been dismissed. That leaves only 1 jury remaining for the day, and we've got way too many people for that. So 50 people are selected to be excused with thanks for their service. My name is called, and I'm done.
And that was the story of my jury duty experience. I guess it wasn't a total waste of time... though it's hard not to think that when I spent two days doing nothing short of sitting around doing nothing. Oh well. At least I've served my time until next time.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
Doing my part to uphold the Seventh Amendment
Is this what we have to go through to uphold the American right to a trial by jury? Perhaps so. I must say, they have gone to great lengths to make the process as painless and efficient as possible.
As one might have guessed, I'm sitting here in the Jury Assembly room of the King County Superior Court at the Regional Justice Center in Kent. Fortunately they have wifi internet connectivity here, which makes for a slightly more efficient way to pass the time. But in the interests of infotainment, here's a running commentary of today's events thus far:
8:00am - Arrive at the courthouse, make your way through the metal detectors at security, and check in with the nice people at the desk in the Jury Assembly room. Nice facility, I must say... and very efficient process. Just have to grab a clipboard and fill out my "Juror Biography" form (in triplicate, of course... gotta love bureaucracy) that basically asks your age, occupation, where you live, and various other classifying questions that would be provided to the lawyers should you be picked for a jury pool.
8:30am - I'd suspect about 150-200 potential jurors are gathered by now. One of the judges dropped by to welcome us all and give us an obviously scripted spiel about how important we are to the judicial process and such... though she obviously ad-libbed a lot of it too and added much more sincerity than a scripted list would do. This followed by a well-designed, yet incredibly cheesy "How to be a juror" video describing the activities. I felt like I was watching the pre-flight safety briefing video you see on some airplanes.
9:00am - Orientation complete... time to sit around and do nothing. We get the first announcement of the day, informing us that there are 4 potential jury trials on the docket today. Sit back, relax, and enjoy doing nothing.
9:30am - Update... 1 of the 4 potential trials will not be requiring a jury. Make that 3 potential jury trials remaining. I think it's a slow day at the RJC.
10:20am - After a brief 20 minute break to walk around and stretch our legs outside of the JA room, we receive the first jury impaneling of the morning. 15 names are called, and they all immediately leave for their mission. 2 potential juries remain.
11:00am - The 2 trials may still need juries, but definitely not before lunch. Since official lunch time is 12:00am-1:30pm, we may leave now and be back by 1:30pm. A nice 2 1/2 hour lunch break. I realized that I should have brought my laptop, and now with a 2.5 hour break, I drove back to my parents house in Federal Way, got my laptop and had some lunch... and then got back to the RJC at about 12:45 or so to sit and relax with the wifi connectivity.
1:30pm - Everyone's back from lunch, and time to call more jurors. This time they're going to impanel 40 jurors. (Based on this, we guess that it's probably a pretty big criminal trial they're dealing with.) I was not one of the 40 selected. Good news or bad news? We shall see. The 40 all turn in their juror bio forms and receive a number, and come back to relax some more while the counsel reviews their forms. Tick tick tick... 1 potential jury remains.
2:15pm - The 40-member jury panel receives word that the case has settled (I've watched enough Law and Order to piece this together... lots of legal bluffing from one side or the other... threatening to go to a jury, scared the defense enough to take a plea). As a result, those 40 people who did nothing but get assigned a number, are dismissed with the thanks of the court. They were technically on a jury even though they never actually left the jury room... so they don't have to come back tomorrow and they're done. Suddenly everyone's wishing they were one of the 40 selected. :)
2:30pm - With one potential jury remaining, and by my estimations well over 100 potential jurors in the room, it's quite clear that a lot of us will be returning tomorrow. But, at this point I have a minor celebrity-sighting. Who is one of the other potential jurors in the pool, none other than former Washington State Governor Mike Lowry! As my friend Jonell said, "That's a mug you can't miss!" True enough. Anyway, shortly after 2:30, we get the final announcement: the last trial has plenty of work to get through the rest of the day, and won't need a jury until tomorrow. So, we're all excused early, and will report again at 8:45am on Thursday. If we still aren't selected, that's the ballgame and we've served our time. Otherwise in the unfortunate event that I get selected for a jury, I could end up back again later the following week to continue on a trial. We'll see how things turn out. Time to go home!
As one might have guessed, I'm sitting here in the Jury Assembly room of the King County Superior Court at the Regional Justice Center in Kent. Fortunately they have wifi internet connectivity here, which makes for a slightly more efficient way to pass the time. But in the interests of infotainment, here's a running commentary of today's events thus far:
8:00am - Arrive at the courthouse, make your way through the metal detectors at security, and check in with the nice people at the desk in the Jury Assembly room. Nice facility, I must say... and very efficient process. Just have to grab a clipboard and fill out my "Juror Biography" form (in triplicate, of course... gotta love bureaucracy) that basically asks your age, occupation, where you live, and various other classifying questions that would be provided to the lawyers should you be picked for a jury pool.
8:30am - I'd suspect about 150-200 potential jurors are gathered by now. One of the judges dropped by to welcome us all and give us an obviously scripted spiel about how important we are to the judicial process and such... though she obviously ad-libbed a lot of it too and added much more sincerity than a scripted list would do. This followed by a well-designed, yet incredibly cheesy "How to be a juror" video describing the activities. I felt like I was watching the pre-flight safety briefing video you see on some airplanes.
9:00am - Orientation complete... time to sit around and do nothing. We get the first announcement of the day, informing us that there are 4 potential jury trials on the docket today. Sit back, relax, and enjoy doing nothing.
9:30am - Update... 1 of the 4 potential trials will not be requiring a jury. Make that 3 potential jury trials remaining. I think it's a slow day at the RJC.
10:20am - After a brief 20 minute break to walk around and stretch our legs outside of the JA room, we receive the first jury impaneling of the morning. 15 names are called, and they all immediately leave for their mission. 2 potential juries remain.
11:00am - The 2 trials may still need juries, but definitely not before lunch. Since official lunch time is 12:00am-1:30pm, we may leave now and be back by 1:30pm. A nice 2 1/2 hour lunch break. I realized that I should have brought my laptop, and now with a 2.5 hour break, I drove back to my parents house in Federal Way, got my laptop and had some lunch... and then got back to the RJC at about 12:45 or so to sit and relax with the wifi connectivity.
1:30pm - Everyone's back from lunch, and time to call more jurors. This time they're going to impanel 40 jurors. (Based on this, we guess that it's probably a pretty big criminal trial they're dealing with.) I was not one of the 40 selected. Good news or bad news? We shall see. The 40 all turn in their juror bio forms and receive a number, and come back to relax some more while the counsel reviews their forms. Tick tick tick... 1 potential jury remains.
2:15pm - The 40-member jury panel receives word that the case has settled (I've watched enough Law and Order to piece this together... lots of legal bluffing from one side or the other... threatening to go to a jury, scared the defense enough to take a plea). As a result, those 40 people who did nothing but get assigned a number, are dismissed with the thanks of the court. They were technically on a jury even though they never actually left the jury room... so they don't have to come back tomorrow and they're done. Suddenly everyone's wishing they were one of the 40 selected. :)
2:30pm - With one potential jury remaining, and by my estimations well over 100 potential jurors in the room, it's quite clear that a lot of us will be returning tomorrow. But, at this point I have a minor celebrity-sighting. Who is one of the other potential jurors in the pool, none other than former Washington State Governor Mike Lowry! As my friend Jonell said, "That's a mug you can't miss!" True enough. Anyway, shortly after 2:30, we get the final announcement: the last trial has plenty of work to get through the rest of the day, and won't need a jury until tomorrow. So, we're all excused early, and will report again at 8:45am on Thursday. If we still aren't selected, that's the ballgame and we've served our time. Otherwise in the unfortunate event that I get selected for a jury, I could end up back again later the following week to continue on a trial. We'll see how things turn out. Time to go home!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
