|
|
Post by tjaman on Sept 11, 2006 8:21:23 GMT -5
This is not the 9/11 column I wanted to do, but I might get to expand on it later. For now, suffice it to say that I'm ticked off that weekends are only two days, and that while it was sort of restful it also sort of wasn't.
I did watch all of Veronica Mars' first season and that it kicked so much ass, and now I need to buy both seasons and glom onto S3 when it starts. Rob Thomas found the perfect mix of storytelling, emotional intensity, quirkiness, voice and dramatic potential in building these beautiful, beautiful characters and it's so much better than most things on teevee.
Heading over to jury duty. Wish me luck. 
|
|
|
|
Post by TheMasterGeek on Sept 11, 2006 9:36:46 GMT -5
I'm glad that we have another MarsFan among our group.
|
|
|
|
Post by tjaman on Sept 11, 2006 11:26:54 GMT -5
They didn't want me. They picked other people. 
And I was all ready to find the guy guilty, too, just based on the questions they were asking us ("Can you keep beating a person up after they're unconscious?" "Are there limits to how far you can go to defend your home?" "Is there a point at which self-defense becomes aggravated assault?" Oh, and I loved this one: "Can you rig something up to defend your home if you're not there?")
Well, and innocent, too. He seemed like kind of a schlub sitting there and you sort of wonder if after decades of people coming up to him and beating him up for no reason he just snapped.
But that "rigging" thing. I mean, you're allowed to train a guard dog of course, and if it mauls a child you're liable. Or if you rig up 1,000 volt charge to your doorbell and "get" some unsuspecting Girl Scout, that seems out of line, too. Or a welcome mat with a trap door in it (Tex Avery has clearly prepared me for the worst instincts of human nature).
So I think this was probably going to be a fun trial and a very fun deliberation with people lying and insinuating and holding forth and betraying secrets and bursting into tears in every conceivable direction like a David E. Kelley production at its finest and I'd be back in the jury room saying things like "But he's lying!" which of course I have no immediate insight into so that would've been completely out of line.
But fun.
Anyway, back to work I suppose ...
|
|
|
|
Post by quantumcat on Sept 11, 2006 14:20:33 GMT -5
tj,they probably didn't want anyone too smart or thoughtful or ethical on this.
Forget the 'truth,whole truth and nothing but the truth' schtick.
Both the prosecution and the defense are honour-bound to pursue their agenda
at all (legal) costs for the benefit of society.
The court has to apply its own rules and suppress any evidence that goes against the
dictates of the law.
The jury has to ignore personal prejudice,gut instinct and everything but the 'proofs'
submitted in the proper manner.
It wouldn't be hard to notice that you could see through a lot of manipulation and misdirection.
You'd be likely to notice holes in the presentations of both sides.
You'd pick up the 'tells' of the witnesses.
No lawyer would want you 'confusing' your fellow jurors with pertinent observations nor would
they want you guiding their handpicked puppets toward conclusions that they couldn't be sure they
implanted themselves.
Adrian Monk,Johnny Smith,Sam Beckett,Juror #8,etc. are the suits' worst nightmares.
Not because they might solve the crime or even run off with the jury.
They might live up to their oath and make a fair and intelligent evaluation of the evidence.
The attorneys DE-selct jurors who won't be 100% wedded to their cause,fully aware the other
side is doing the same.
The judge wants people who will be calm,fast ,won't cause a mistrial and won't seek his ouster
from the bench or jury nullification.
They could handle a juror who found his service to be FUN.
What they couldn't deal with was one who was a mite too cognizant of their gimmicks and was
besmirched with integrity.
Better luck next time!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by GreatMuppetyNick on Sept 11, 2006 20:44:17 GMT -5
They didn't want me. They picked other people.
And I was all ready to find the guy guilty, too
Maybe that's why they didn't pick you?
After all, I think they're going for the innocent until proven guilty type people. |
|
|
|
Post by tjaman on Sept 11, 2006 21:00:24 GMT -5
They didn't want me. They picked other people.
And I was all ready to find the guy guilty, too
Maybe that's why they didn't pick you?
After all, I think they're going for the innocent until proven guilty type people. |
|
|
|
Post by GreatMuppetyNick on Sept 11, 2006 21:02:05 GMT -5
What?
I have to pay attention as well? What fun is that?
Besides, it's harder to slander people when you do that attention thing. 
....
There's an apology in there somewhere. You just have to look harder.
|
|
