You can only do this once, but you can get out of jury duty by saying "I looked up the case beforehand".
You can only do this once, but you can get out of jury duty by saying "I looked up the case beforehand".
Just saved myself a few hours with that one.
You're viewing a single thread.
Don't actually do this though
Would that even work? The premise of the court is it is impartial. If you're a misanthropist, you hate everyone, that's impartial.
It may work, but you now have government witnesses to you saying you hate everyone to the point it affects your mental capacities to think and judge and must be excused from society. It will come back to bite you if anything happens in the future.
My dad got booted from a jury because he was a volunteer firefighter and it was an arson case.
Apparently they didn't want people prejudiced against arsonists.
I get the idea that a firefighter would be opossed to the idea of somebody who setting fires but by that same logic that should disqualify everybody who isnt a clinically diagnosed psycopath from ever serving on a jury for a murder case in the event they're going into the case with a negative perception of people who kill other people.
would be opossed to the idea of somebody who setting fires
Actually I'm thinking it's more likely that they got rid of him on the chance that he knows something about fires and the telltale signs of arson. Lawyers might not want a bigot but they definitely don't want an expert on the Jury.
Yes, generally speaking, the more intelligent you appear the riskier the trial becomes if you’re judging. If they want experts, they’ll pay someone they know will align with their side to show up. As for jurors, they want the average joe. Smart enough to put on his socks and drive to court, but also obedient enough to feel awe and respect for the institutions.
It’s this, however also, firefighters are statistically the most likely people to be arsonists, and the lawyer definitely doesn’t want an expert on the jury who is also potentially sympathetic to the defendant!
Apparently they didn't want people prejudiced against arsonists.
Ah, but have you considered the funnier possibility that they didn't want anyone who might look at an arsonist and think "this guy is good job security for me?"
If anything I'd be more concerned they'd be sympathetic because of the disproportionate percentage of firefighters that are arsonists.
Also I know you were joking but as a volunteer firefighter I promise my dad wasn't hoping for more opportunities to have to put out fires for free.
well what if I do the good murder. looking pretty bias'd there, my guy, why do you hate the rule of law?
I wouldn't risk a chance of pissing off a judge too much
I wish i could have gotten paid $10,000 to sit on a fake jury
I feel like wkuk did that better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCV5hro9ecs
Also first. It's not a super unique idea but also it bares a striking resemblance.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy: