Jury Duty

pgj2015

I got a letter asking me to be on a jury about 7 years ago, I was studying law at the time so I was interested in doing it. But then i got another letter to say they were PLEASED to inform me that I had been excused from jury duty. I wonder what the reason was, do defending solicitors have a look at the potential jury and object to say males from 25-30 or women from 45-55?

Gregor Samsa

Served on one for an assault case years ago. Everyone said to me to get a letter from my job saying I couldn't do it - I couldn't understand why, much rather play Matlock for a few days than work. Boss even tried to give me a letter, but I told him I wasn't working on anything that couldn't wait a week. Selection took one day, then the trial 2, and half a day deliberation and verdict. I had long dreadlocks at the time and I was sure they were going to reject me, but I got selected. I'm not religious, and I would usually not opt to swear on the Bible, but I did that time as I didn't want to be seen to rock the boat in case I got rejected.

Glad I did it, and I'd do it again if called. Very interesting to see some of the mechanics of justice at work.

ThewhiteJesus

i was called last year and ended up on a difficult jury for a difficult case.
But i didn't try and weasel out of it, it's a civic duty and i was treated very well during the case.

AndrewJRenko

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

Yes and why has the Juries Act not been updated. Too many in the "golden circle" exempt from Jury Duty

Is it still based on the electoral register? So if you're not bothered to vote, you won't be bothered by a jury summons?

Surely they could use other lists - Revenue, Social Welfare?

Psychiatric Patrick

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I would like to do it but being self employed I never will

RasTa wrote: »

Just remembered the second case was so boring that the judge fell asleep a few times.

It was Brian Lenihan's wife

The case or the judge?

Psychiatric Patrick

pgj2015 wrote: »

I got a letter asking me to be on a jury about 7 years ago, I was studying law at the time so I was interested in doing it. But then i got another letter to say they were PLEASED to inform me that I had been excused from jury duty. I wonder what the reason was, do defending solicitors have a look at the potential jury and object to say males from 25-30 or women from 45-55?

Maybe it was the persecution that objected?

To be honest, they were probably very unsure how someone who is both a man in in his late 20s and a woman in her late 40s would view the accused.

Yyhhuuu

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

i was called last year and ended up on a difficult jury for a difficult case.
But i didn't try and weasel out of it, it's a civic duty and i was treated very well during the case.

I wouldnt use the derogatory term "weasel out" when people have justifiable reasons for not attending. Perhaps the Legislators should tackle the huge amounts of professionals exempt from serving at trials for no justifiable reasons

Psychiatric Patrick

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

I wouldnt use the derogatory term "weasel out" when people have justifiable reasons for not attending. Perhaps the Legislators should tackle the huge amounts of professionals exempt from serving at trials for no justifiable reasons

"Weasel out" is accurate when you see the number of posters saying "get out of it" and having no reason other than not wanting to do it.

AndyBoBandy

I’ve been called up twice (both before the age of 22).

I made it onto a jury the 2nd time I was called up. Garda raided a guys house and found about 300k worth of drugs.

On day 2 of the trial the judge called us in and explained to us that because the Guards used warrant form 102.4 rev C Instead of form 102.4 rev D (or something to that effect), the raid was null and void and the guy walked.......

It explained why on day 1 and the beginning of day 2 the guy looked like he didn’t have a care in the world (he knew he’d be walking).

Gregor Samsa

pgj2015 wrote: »

I got a letter asking me to be on a jury about 7 years ago, I was studying law at the time so I was interested in doing it. But then i got another letter to say they were PLEASED to inform me that I had been excused from jury duty. I wonder what the reason was, do defending solicitors have a look at the potential jury and object to say males from 25-30 or women from 45-55?

This is only from my experience in the Dublin Central Criminal Court, so it may be different elsewhere.

When you're called, you're just in a big pool with loads of other people - there was over 100 the day I went. You wait. Then you get called to a particular court with about 20 other people. Other people get called it other courts. Some people didn't turn up, so some people who were on the list for one court get called to a different one.

You go in to the court and the give you a bit of a spiell. Each person is called up to be sworn in. Just at that moment, either the prosecution or defence can reject you. They don't give a reason. Sometimes they don't even look up to see who they're rejecting - it's part of the randomisation process, and they'll reject some people for absolutely no reason. If they don't reject you, you swear in and you're on the jury.

If you were excused before you even turned up at court, neither the prosecution or defence would have even been aware of you at that point, so whatever the reason was, it wasn't that either side didn't want you or your demographic.

keano_afc

Got summoned a few years ago. Mate of mine told me to go looking a bit scruffy so I wore an old tracksuit and didnt shave. There were loads of people there but wouldnt you know I was the first name out. I stepped up to be sworn in on a murder trial and I was challenged by the defence. You could hear my sigh of relief in all four courts.

I followed the trial in the press and it lasted 3 months. Dodged a massive bullet.

Psychiatric Patrick

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

I wouldnt use the derogatory term "weasel out" when people have justifiable reasons for not attending. Perhaps the Legislators should tackle the huge amounts of professionals exempt from serving at trials for no justifiable reasons

See the previous post.

Elwood_Blues

I got selected a few years back. It was an assault case if I remember correctly. We sat through 3 days of testimony or whatever you call it. Got our free lunches every day and a garda escort to the restaurant.

When the prosecution rested their case the Judge threw threw it for some reason..

Was gutted because it felt like we were in 12 Angry Men. But the lasting feeling was it seemed like such a waste of everyone's time and money.

Yyhhuuu

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

"Weasel out" is accurate when you see the number of posters saying "get out of it" and having no reason other than not wanting to do it.

Many had legitimate reasons for excusal

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

JasonStatham wrote: »

They wanted me for a pretty serious one. I had just started a new job, so I got my employer to write me a letter saying I felt I was going to miss out on essential training and that i was far too young for judging (18 y.o.).

I can't imagine your age excused you. It's supposed to be a cross-section.

FarmerBrowne

I'll see that Quimby kid hang for this.

Allinall

.anon. wrote: »

I've never been called up. I'd find a way out of it if I was.

I can't remember who said it originally, but when you go on trial, you're essentially putting your fate into the hands of twelve people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty.

mikeecho wrote: »

I'm exempt



Cos I know every Fu ker is guilty.

buried wrote: »

Show up with a MAGA hat. You won't even be picked for your own funeral wearing one a them things.

Hego Damask wrote: »

I'd just refuse to go, f*ck that sh*t

2018na wrote: »

Got one of those letters a couple of years back. You are summoned to Trim court for jury selection. Am I fcuk summoned for anything. Did not reply or do anything. People making up excuses like 5 year olds. Nothing will happen

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

I wouldnt use the derogatory term "weasel out" when people have justifiable reasons for not attending. Perhaps the Legislators should tackle the huge amounts of professionals exempt from serving at trials for no justifiable reasons

These are just from the first page of this thread.

Yyhhuuu

Allinall wrote: »

These are just from the first page of this thread.

Youre being selective.What about the others who had legitimate reasons?

Allinall

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

Youre being selective.What about the others who had legitimate reasons?

I don't have an issue with them.

mojesius

I've been called for the panel twice, selected to serve once.

It was quite a harrowing case, went on for 8 days and we all got a lifetime exemption from the judge afterwards, but I'd still serve again if called up.

I don't really understand why people try to weasel out of it. Sure if you have kids to mind or a struggling business to keep afloat, I get it but everyone else should be prepared to do their civic duty.

blue note

I was called once but not used. I'd do it if I was put on a jury, but I certainly wouldn't enjoy it. A criminal record or jail time are serious and you're the one deciding on it. As is someone commiting a crime and not being punished.

I know a couple of people who were on awful ones and neither wanted to talk about them after. One guy on a gruesome murder trial and another on a case where the guy had allegedly raped his mother. He claimed it was consensual. That one broke down, but she listened to almost a week of it I believe.

And my wife was on one before I knew her. A guy was stopped and found to have a machete in his boot. But there was essentially no evidence against him. She found that some of the other jury members wanted to convict because he looked like trouble and was probably up to no good. They were right, it turned out he had heaps of previous convictions, but you can't convict someone because they look like a scumbag. I can't remember what he was being charged with, but there was no evidence for that.

I really wouldn't like to be on a jury arguing with people that we have to decide based on evidence as opposed to what someone looked like.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

I'd fear not getting my point across well in deliberations. In the written word, I think I can be persuasive but I'm really not great at speaking up in groups and I sometimes struggle to gather my thoughts and express them in an articulate yet expedient way. I'm easily drowned out by more forceful voices. Does everyone get a chance to give their thoughts in jury deliberations?

Lewis_Benson

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

"Weasel out" is accurate when you see the number of posters saying "get out of it" and having no reason other than not wanting to do it.

So what if I Dont want to do it, I should not be forced to.
Like I stated earlier, I'd be far too prejudice in the role, if the defender looked like a scobe and spoke with an inner city Dublin accent and looked like he was off his face, I'd be voting for him to get the chair before proceedings even start.

touts

Was only called for Duty once. Didn't get pulled out of the lottery to serve on an actual panel but my main memory of it was a couple sitting together in the jury room and then in the courtroom near me. A case gets called and some details announced. The woman turned to the man and said something along the lines of "This is Jimmy. This is the one we need to be on". I discreetly found a guard and told him what I heard. He went over to some officials and one went up to the judge. Before jury selection started there was a brief adjournment and we were all sent back to the waiting room. The couple got called out of the room and we never saw them again. Didn't ask what was going on.

bobbyy gee

A jury trial is fun. But might put a fianchial strain. The evedince is not really well set out if they bring in papers. A lot of woman will vote to convict even if person is innocent. As they think person will commit another crine

Gregor Samsa

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I'd fear not getting my point across well in deliberations. In the written word, I think I can be persuasive but I'm really not great at speaking up in groups and I sometimes struggle to gather my thoughts and express them in an articulate yet expedient way. I'm easily drowned out by more forceful voices. Does everyone get a chance to give their thoughts in jury deliberations?

There’s no one in the jury room except the jury, and there’s no set format to how the deliberations go. The foreperson is merely the spokesperson representing the jury in the court. They’re not necessarily in charge of the jury or how things go. It’s supposed to be 12 equals coming to a consensus.

Of course, there’s loads of different personalities, and different ones react and contribute in different ways. My (limited) experience was that the quieter people were encouraged to speak up and given space to do so. It was a very mixed set of backgrounds on my jury, but it was surprisingly diplomatic.

Psychiatric Patrick

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

Many had legitimate reasons for excusal

Yes and some have been mentioned here but “weasel out” was about those / it was about the people posting about “getting out of it”, looking scruffy so to not be picked, etc

Psychiatric Patrick

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

Youre being selective.What about the others who had legitimate reasons?

He is being selective becasue the people with legitimate reasons are not weasels

I was called years ago, was only 19 or 20 or so. I was a student at the time so could have had a get-out but I was curious to see how the procedure worked. Travelled up and down to Cork city three or four times and my name never got drawn on any occasion, so it was essentially a bunch of wasted journeys.

Psychiatric Patrick

blue note wrote: »

I was called once but not used. I'd do it if I was put on a jury, but I certainly wouldn't enjoy it. A criminal record or jail time are serious and you're the one deciding on it. As is someone commiting a crime and not being punished.

I know a couple of people who were on awful ones and neither wanted to talk about them after. One guy on a gruesome murder trial and another on a case where the guy had allegedly raped his mother. He claimed it was consensual. That one broke down, but she listened to almost a week of it I believe.

And my wife was on one before I knew her. A guy was stopped and found to have a machete in his boot. But there was essentially no evidence against him. She found that some of the other jury members wanted to convict because he looked like trouble and was probably up to no good. They were right, it turned out he had heaps of previous convictions, but you can't convict someone because they look like a scumbag. I can't remember what he was being charged with, but there was no evidence for that.

I really wouldn't like to be on a jury arguing with people that we have to decide based on evidence as opposed to what someone looked like.

I would like the experience just to know what it is really like. I joke that I’d convict someone in shiny tracksuit or not guilty for an attractive woman but really I would be nervous to be on a case where the person might be innocent but also might be guilty.

And I don’t know how I would be in a room with 11 others - some like me and others who may have made up there mind.

I couldn’t handle a sexual assault case - couldn’t bear to see or hear the evidence.

Psychiatric Patrick

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I'd fear not getting my point across well in deliberations. In the written word, I think I can be persuasive but I'm really not great at speaking up in groups and I sometimes struggle to gather my thoughts and express them in an articulate yet expedient way. I'm easily drowned out by more forceful voices. Does everyone get a chance to give their thoughts in jury deliberations?

I’d either be too quiet or I’d fight with the loud mouth in the group

I would imagine every one gets a chance to speak but I don’t think there is a set way of doing things.

All I know comes from12 Angry Men

Psychiatric Patrick

Lewis_Benson wrote: »

So what if I Dont want to do it, I should not be forced to.
Like I stated earlier, I'd be far too prejudice in the role, if the defender looked like a scobe and spoke with an inner city Dublin accent and looked like he was off his face, I'd be voting for him to get the chair before proceedings even start.

Where did I or anyone else say you should be forced to?

Why are you whinging at me? If called you don’t want to do and would weasel your way out of it.

Psychiatric Patrick

touts wrote: »

Was only called for Duty once. Didn't get pulled out of the lottery to serve on an actual panel but my main memory of it was a couple sitting together in the jury room and then in the courtroom near me. A case gets called and some details announced. The woman turned to the man and said something along the lines of "This is Jimmy. This is the one we need to be on". I discreetly found a guard and told him what I heard. He went over to some officials and one went up to the judge. Before jury selection started there was a brief adjournment and we were all sent back to the waiting room. The couple got called out of the room and we never saw them again. Didn't ask what was going on.

Fair play. That is actually pretty good story. John Grisham could spin that into a good yarn.

HildaOgdenx

I've never been called. I'd certainly do it, if called.

I think it must be quite difficult , especially in some cases, I imagine some of what has to be seen and heard by the jury could be quite harrowing.

Nexytus

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

He is being selective becasue the people with legitimate reasons are not weasels

Civic Responsibility - it's relativistic. Like there might be some other guy who thinks that you are a weasel because you don't go around your community picking up litter on a Saturday. Or you don't volunteer to teach poor, illiterate people to read. Or report your girlfriend's traffic violations to the police.
By the same token the jury-Dodger might seem a stiff, goody two shoes to the neighbourhood drug dealer or loan shark.

anplaya27

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I got the fifth call last week.

That was after an excusal in 2018 with medical evidence due to my deafness. Served before the deafness though, but was not called. that was in 2006 and I am not a member of the Defence Forces for the record.

Did everything I could to inform them now but nothing in response at all. So my OH who has form said to just turn up on the day and say your piece to the Court Clerk and leave.

I would not be able to hear proceedings at all. And that would not be fair to anyone.

Deaf ISL users are now allowed to sit on jury panels with interpreters now ( previously were forbidden).

SweetCaliber

I've been called for it for the end of the month.

I'd actually like to be picked to sit, would like to know how the system works and get a perspective of it.

Allinall

Nexytus wrote: »

Civic Responsibility - it's relativistic. Like there might be some other guy who thinks that you are a weasel because you don't go around your community picking up litter on a Saturday. Or you don't volunteer to teach poor, illiterate people to read. Or report your girlfriend's traffic violations to the police.
By the same token the jury-Dodger might seem a stiff, goody two shoes to the neighbourhood drug dealer or loan shark.

It’s more than a civic duty.
It’s a legal obligation.

You can’t be convicted in court for not picking up litter.

Nexytus

Allinall wrote: »

It’s more than a civic duty.
It’s a legal obligation.

You can’t be convicted in court for not picking up litter.

When you're excused then it is not a legal offence.
The people 'weaseling' were endeavoring to and successfully getting excused.
They were being called out here for lacking civic spirit. Not for doing anything illegal.
So your point makes no sense.

Spanish Eyes

anplaya27 wrote: »

Deaf ISL users are now allowed to sit on jury panels with interpreters now ( previously were forbidden).

I am not an ISL user. So am goosed.

Still no reply from the Courts Service to my pleading email. Will have to just turn up on the day and explain my predicament. It is stressful.

I did serve on a jury for two weeks back in the day, but really cannot do it anymore for the sake of the accused and the proceedings and the jury room stuff.

Did my bit. But am a bit concerned that if I am fined I might have a conviction. That is not what I want at all.

touts

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

Fair play. That is actually pretty good story. John Grisham could spin that into a good yarn.

Grisham's characters are usually fairly clever. These two were a bit dopey. I don't think they were there to get a mate off in some sort of conspiracy. I think they were just from a rough area and knew one of the lads on trial and were stupid enough to talk about it with people around.

cj maxx

I was called for a rape trial but after showing up twice we were told the trial wasn’t going ahead.
Maybe he changed his plea idk.
Anyway I won’t get called again seemingly

Yyhhuuu

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I am not an ISL user. So am goosed.

Still no reply from the Courts Service to my pleading email. Will have to just turn up on the day and explain my predicament. It is stressful.

I did serve on a jury for two weeks back in the day, but really cannot do it anymore for the sake of the accused and the proceedings and the jury room stuff.

Did my bit. But am a bit concerned that if I am fined I might have a conviction. That is not what I want at all.

Phone them

Yyhhuuu

Why aren't self employed jurors paid by the courts service for their time and work on Juries. Seems only fair.

Samsgirl

Was called 2 years ago but not selected to serve. Would have loved to though. Found it fascinating.

Am expemt now so can't be called again. Work for Dept of Justice.

Yyhhuuu

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/serving-on-an-irish-jury-it-s-very-daunting-1.4196798%3fmode=amp

Spanish Eyes

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

Phone them

I cannot hear well on the phone. Anyway there is absolutely no phone contact allowed AFAIS. It is all email.

They did reply to my email, and said they would be in contact within 14 days which is up this Wednesday coming.

If I don't hear anything I will go to the CCJ on the day with my previous documents and speak politely to the court clerk. Hoping for the best, but really do not need this right now.

8mv

Selected for jury three times - first time sent to the jury room to sort ourselves out and when we came back the case was dismissed after a legal argument. Second time we heard evidence in the morning and after lunch the defendant changed their plea to 'guilty' so we were dismissed. Third time lucky - got to reach a decision. Thankfully it was a minor case of property damage - no one hurt or killed. Facinating process and I'd serve again no problem. My experience has been that the judge and court officials are very aware that jury members are unfamilair with procedures and may be anxious about what is expected of them so they do their best to re-assure and help the jury.

Yyhhuuu

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I cannot hear well on the phone. Anyway there is absolutely no phone contact allowed AFAIS. It is all email.

They did reply to my email, and said they would be in contact within 14 days which is up this Wednesday coming.

If I don't hear anything I will go to the CCJ on the day with my previous documents and speak politely to the court clerk. Hoping for the best, but really do not need this right now.

You did your best. That's all you can do. The ball is in their court now. Dont worry you wont be prosecuted. Good to send an e mail. You should send a reminder e mail
They may immediately reply to this. This has been my experience after receiving the initial acknowledgement from them. I think the Jury Summons are centralised in Ennis, Co.Clare.

BeerWolf

Was on Jury Duty earlier this year, took 4 days... of some drunk old man smashing a bottle over some tourist's head. Found him Guilty.

Exciting stuff...!