RE: Jury Duty

RE: Jury Duty (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

Message

stef -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 10:01:07 AM)
Mistrials generally occur for other reasons. When a judge sets aside a verdict, it's called JNOV (judgment non obstante veredicto). It is usually applied when a judge believes there were insufficient facts or evidence to support the verdict or that the verdict failed to correctly apply the law in the case. ~stef

sirsholly -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 10:09:15 AM)
I have heard of a Judge giving the jury their choices of a verdict...the jury finds the person guilty with a choice given by the judge...and he overruled it...

stef -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 10:17:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly I have heard of a Judge giving the jury their choices of a verdict...the jury finds the person guilty with a choice given by the judge...and he overruled it... Likely due to one of the two reasons given above. ~stef

sirsholly -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 10:22:37 AM)
Nope...it was in the paper here.The jury found the guy guilty of 2nd degree murder but the judge felt it was manslaughter. I recall the entire thing because i was called to jury duty the week prior to that happening and thought "why bother?"

DesFIP -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 10:23:30 AM)
Can we clarify jury as to petit or grand? It has been said that a good D.A. can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich and I believe it. Grand jury powers date from before the constitution. You can plead the fifth amendment in a petit jury case but in grand jury if you answer any question you then lose the right to plead the fifth. WTF? I'll do petit jury but not grand and I'm honest about why. The clerk doesn't care, he'll just transfer me over.

stef -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 10:28:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly Nope...it was in the paper here.The jury found the guy guilty of 2nd degree murder but the judge felt it was manslaughter. As I have already said, it's likely because he felt there were insufficient facts or evidence to support the verdict of 2nd degree murder or the verdict failed to correctly apply the law to support a finding of 2nd degree murder. ~stef

sirsholly -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 10:31:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly Nope...it was in the paper here.The jury found the guy guilty of 2nd degree murder but the judge felt it was manslaughter. As I have already said, it's likely because he felt there were insufficient facts or evidence to support the verdict of 2nd degree murder or the verdict failed to correctly apply the law to support a finding of 2nd degree murder. ~stef thats why everyone was up in arms over it and slamming the judge, huh Stef? There was discilpinary action taken against the judge but i am certain you already know that, too

stef -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 10:31:31 AM)
And for what it's worth, it's not the judge who gives "choices of a verdict", it's the district attorney's office who decides what charges are brought against a defendant. ~stef

stef -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 10:35:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly thats why everyone was up in arms over it and slamming the judge, huh Stef? There was discilpinary action taken against the judge but i am certain you already know that, too Is there a reason you're taking this so personally? I gave LIKELY reasons as to why a competent judge might invoke JNOV. That's not saying that a judge might go off the rails and decide to hijack a verdict as you seem to be claiming in this instance. ~stef

VirginPotty -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 12:35:59 PM)
I was on a jury last year on a civil case. Lotsa fun, yet boring at the same time :( When they called the #'s that were selected to go into the jury box, the judge said that the 1st # called is to be the foreman.................dat be me!!!! Just a civil case, but interesting. The notepads we were given in the beginning were interesting, well, mine was anyway. It still had notes from another trial, with such catch phrases as, "Hammer to the head". [:'(] Oh, forgot to answer the OP's question....Civic duty.

KatyLied -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 12:51:20 PM)
I've done jury duty once, I hope to never have to subject myself to it again. It was a (three day) case that should've/could've been settled out of court. The parties were within $5,000 of reaching a financial settlement for damages, but neither side would negotiate further. They came into court with most of the items of the case already agreed to by both sides. What I liked most about serving was that after the trial was over the Judge invited us into his chambers and talked to us and answered questions. Very cool indeed.

Raechard -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 2:02:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VirginPotty It still had notes from another trial, with such catch phrases as, "Hammer to the head". [:'(] It's funny someone actually had to write that down to remember it.[:D]

Daddysredhead -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 6:02:47 PM)
Civic duty

GreedyTop -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 6:13:09 PM)
civic duty.

cravesdom -> RE: Jury Duty (10/10/2008 6:23:52 PM)
Definitely civic duty.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.515625E-02