In my experiences, it reveals the shortcomings in the system.
I was on a jury where a couple jurors didn't want to convict a drunk driver, despite the strong evidence (video and audio) against him. Why? Because one juror had a relative who drank and drove - and had never harmed anyone. The other juror did the same, themselves.
I was on another jury where a store owner was being sued because a woman wasn't watching her kid, and the kid tried to climb up on a table and the table fell over - giving the kid a minor scratch. The woman was suing the store for tens of thousands of dollars for "emotional trauma" and "medical bills". The medical bill was ... the kid got a bandaid from the ER. The jury was split. (The judge should have thrown out the case, IMO ... or charged the mother with negligence, if she REALLY believed the kid was that harmed by the event.)
Thank you for your helpful and informative reply Walt. I just asked a question about why juries have to be unanimous? Why can't the majority rule? I don't get it. Do you?
I believe Oregon is the last state where verdicts do NOT have to be unanimous ... but they are considering legislation to change that.
Why do other states require unanimous verdicts? Probably because it is easier than ... if not unanimous, is 7/12 enough to convict or should it be 9/12 or some other ratio?
One was for a young man (around 20) who accidentally killed his best friend while driving drunk (he was a passenger). Excessively graphic!! after 4 days, they settled out of court.
One Was for a man who wanted to be considered sane. He said he was perfectly sane and the judge could crawl inside his brain to see for himself. Sent him back to Happy Acres.
I was selected a few times but never made it to serving on an actual jury. I don't why. My face maybe? So I've always wondered about it. I just asked a question about consensus on juries. Why must the vote be unanimous or the jury is hung? Why not majority rule? Thank you for yout helpful reply. I would not want to have to look at gory pictures. I'd get nightmares for sure. :(
I have only been requested to serve on a jury one time in my life. It was something I had always wanted to do. Seemed like fun to me, but that's probably because I've watched far too many "Law and Order" episodes. Anyhow, when my chance finally came around it fell during a time when I was to be out of town due to my participating in a donor program for my brother who had cancer. I was obviously excused from duty without question and haven't been asked to serve again since. There's still plenty of time though. I'm sure an opportunity will come back around. When it does, I EXPECT THE WORKS! I wanna be sequestered, give post trial interviews to Anderson Cooper, and maybe even write a book about it. LOL!
Me too Twink! I've been called to serve a few times but never actually made it on the jury. I have no idea why. Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I've watched movies where the juries were sequestered for days and couldn't agree. I think that's silly. Why not majority rule? It works every place else. Happy Wednesday! :)
Twice. The first time, it was attempted murder. A couple was walking home and the perpetrator jumped out from behind a car and demanded the man's money while pointing a gun at him. The girlfriend ran into the street to see if she could flag down a passing car, but she could't and the perp shot the man whom they subsequently caught. There was one holdout for conviction. The juror based it on the fact that the girlfriend didn't notice that the perp was wearing a diamond earring in his ear. It was very contentious in that jury room. I told her that when you're faced with looking down the barrel of a gun, you don't see an earring in the man's ear - all you see is that gun. To prove my point, a little later on, I told the juror sitting next to me to notice that I was wearing hoop earrings, which had on since the beginning of the trial. I told her to watch what I was going to do. I engaged the holdout in conversation while at the same time, removing my earrings from my ears in front of everyone. I asked the holdout what earrings I had worn and she said I wasn't wearing any. With that, I opened my hand and showed her both earrings that i had taken out while she was looking at me and the juror next to me confirmed that I had told her what I was going to do. I said to the juror if she didn't notice that i tool of both of my earrings while we were talking to one another, in a peaceful non-threatening situation, it was completely reasonable that under the circumstances of a robbery with a gun-toting perp, the girlfriend would not notice a diamond earring. Believe it or not, she wouldn't give up, but one of the other jurors told me as we were leaving for the day that he would convince her to see it our way and the following day, she relented and we convicted him unanimously.
After the verdict, the jurors went back to the jury room and the attorneys came in along with the judge to thank us for our service. The judge told us that after he verdict was read, the perp confessed to doing the deed so that if any of us felt guilty, we shouldn't.
Wow! Very impressed with thee are me...am me? You should have been an attorney L. That was some swell device you created to make your point! Worthy of a movie or TV plot in fact! Thank you for sharing your real-life experience in such detail. I've been selected a few times but never made it to the jury box. I don't know why. I just asked a question about juries though. Why doesn't MAJORITY RULE rule? Why must it be 100% agreement? Doesn't make sense to me. Happy Wednesday! :)
I don't know why 100% is required - perhaps because it's attempted murder, and there was a gun involved. There are some cases where only a majority is needed, but that's probably in civil trials, not felonies. Happy Wednesday. :)
Walt O'Reagun 