Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sounds like the judge is an idiot that gets off on the power he has. "You will respect my o'thorty". Being a judge is no proof that someone is smart.
It's kind of ironic that this country has legal protections for those accused of crimes, including right to a jury trial, to face your accused, protections from cruel and unusual punishment. Yet if you offend a judge he can make your life hell for simply having a different opinion.
Look at it objectively...should a person that has personal biases against the race of those accused of a crime be serving on a jury in a case against people of those races?
She won't get far as it is a constitutional requirement in the U.S. Constitution. Really the only requirement to being a U.S. citizen. If a Judge wants to keep her on Juror Duty status, he can and there really isn't much she can do about it. I believe for the current standard you can be on call for a month or more, and he can just call her in every day if he chooses.
The Sixth Ammendment states "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law..."
Nowhere in this ammendment nor anywhere in the Constitution will one find language that defines the manner in which the impartial jury shall be empaneled.
The judge violated the 13th Ammendment by requiring her to remain indefinitely on jury duty - and it could alos be argued that the requirement that she show up at the courthouse against her will to serve on a jury is a violation of the 13th ammendment:
- Neither slavery norinvoluntary servitude;except as a punishment for crime wherof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Jury duty should be a voluntary employment like all other tasks that are performed in the government system, and the jurors should be paid at the very least a minimum wage and not the ridiculous stipends they receive now.
people have to remember that jury duty is not a bad thing. they have to not only go into a jury box to determine the guilt or innocence of the ddefendent, but also judge the constitutionality of the law that the defendent is being prosecuted on.
jury nullification is a good thing, not a bad one.
I have been on 2 federal juries in the 90's. it was great doing a jury nullification on weapons charges when the goverment has no authority to do so in the 1st place.
people have to remember that jury duty is not a bad thing. they have to not only go into a jury box to determine the guilt or innocence of the ddefendent, but also judge the constitutionality of the law that the defendent is being prosecuted on.
jury nullification is a good thing, not a bad one.
You can be on Jury Duty and be called in every day yet never actually be on an actual Jury deciding a verdict.
I have never served in jury duty, so I wouldn't know. Ironically, I've voted in every presidential and governor election since 2004.
My point being, if there is a racist person on jury duty, who is to say that person won't be on the jury making a verdict? That is a risk that scares me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.