Jury Service: Attending against employer's wishes.

delta0 said:
True :D

Hopefuly it works out for the OP. I think the company should have had enough time to prepare. Seems like they are trying to defer indefinitely.
Click to expand...

It does sound that way, but surely they should realise that its best to get it over with, the OP will keep getting a summons and will eventually have to go through jury duty sooner or later.
 
wonko said:
No... if you've won the lottery already then that is history and does not affect the probability of winning the next draw. Are you really saying that if you had won the last 999 lotteries then you'd have a lower probability than I would have winning the 1000th? (And if so, how is that consistent with the first quote above?)
Click to expand...

delta0 said:
Agree but there are multiple events occuring in future. Just one of events have the same probability.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid this doesn't make any sense to me.

Anyway, hope the OP has a high probability of sorting this out :)
 
porushinobu said:
It does sound that way, but surely they should realise that its best to get it over with, the OP will keep getting a summons and will eventually have to go through jury duty sooner or later.
Click to expand...

They don't have to worry about it after a certain point as he is being made redundant
 
The fact is, doing Jury Service now has no statistical affect whatsoever on you being called again later. End of...


Now back on topic, I've got my summons this morning for Jury Service too. Luckily I work for a good employer so fine with them and it's only a 5 day max Coroners' Court hearing so I won't have to condemn anyone.
 
To throw a spanner in... There is a statistical effect when the judge excludes you from further jury duty such as when you are done serving a case that has gone on for an extended time. Like mine for 6 months. My probability of serving another duty is 0 :p
 
Zethor said:
delta0, the OP has already received a summons - the coin was flipped. The odds of him getting a second summons (the result of a second coin flip) is the same.
Click to expand...
I keep hearing that but its doesn't seem correct to me. Once you have been summoned you have a profile that profile can reduce you chance of getting a second summons all the way down 0% or in some cases a good profile increases you chance of being used again. Its not a 100% random chance. Your profile has to be suitable for the case in question or you will not get used.

For example if you get summoned the first time and they determine you are not suitable for jury service or not suitable for certain types of cases you don't have the same odds of getting a second summons. Likewise there is a high case of people getting summoned young being suitable and getting repeat summons. The odds are not even as its not a 100% chance thing.
 
Dj_Jestar said:
To throw a spanner in... There is a statistical effect when the judge excludes you from further jury duty such as when you are done serving a case that has gone on for an extended time. Like mine for 6 months. My probability of serving another duty is 0 :p
Click to expand...

except for when there is a clerical error and you are called by mistake :p
 
delta0 said:
The probability of multiple independent events occuring are multiplied together. For example. Let's say we have ten people and 1 is picked at random and then returned. There is a 1/10 chance of being picked. Every event there is a 1/10 chance of being picked. However the probability of being picked once over 5 selection processes is 5/10 or 1/2.

Let's say now you were picked on the first round. The chance of being picked again during the second round is 1/10 x 1/10 = 1/100
Or if we are picked on the first round being picked once more during the remaining four rounds is 1/10 x 4 x 1/10 = 1/25

The chance of being picked twice during the entire 5 picks is 5 x 1/10 x 1/10 = 1/20

etc..

Independent events have the same probaility for each event but everyone isn't put through the selection process just once. What we have is multiple independent events.
Click to expand...

I think where you're falling down in your previous posts is that once an event has occurred then the probability if it occurring is 1. So an event has already occurred, that doesn't change the probability of it occurring again if the events are independent. In your example the probability of you being picked in the second round given you've been picked in the first round is 1 * 1/10 or just 1/10. The probability doesn't change, they're independent events.

The probability of being picked in the first round and the second round is 1/100 but the fact you've already been picked in the first round (1/10) doesn't change your probability of being picked in the second (still 1/10).
 
Pottsey said:
I keep hearing that but its doesn't seem correct to me. Once you have been summoned you have a profile that profile can reduce you chance of getting a second summons all the way down 0% or in some cases a good profile increases you chance of being used again. Its not a 100% random chance. Your profile has to be suitable for the case in question or you will not get used.

For example if you get summoned the first time and they determine you are not suitable for jury service or not suitable for certain types of cases you don't have the same odds of getting a second summons. Likewise there is a high case of people getting summoned young being suitable and getting repeat summons. The odds are not even as its not a 100% chance thing.
Click to expand...

So you think the judicial system has a big computer scoring people and then basing it's selection process on that?

No. It's a random selection and anyone and everyone who is registered on the same amount of government accessible lists has the same chance of being selected (they do admit though that if you feature on more lists you are more likely to be selected, so someone who holds a UK driving licence and is on the electoral role is more likely to be selected than someone just on the electoral role).

There are no "profiles" and no one scoring your suitability to be on a jury. You are either eligible or you are not and only the latter won't be called, the people in the former group all have the same chance (withstanding the bit above about being on more lists).
 
Pottsey said:
I keep hearing that but its doesn't seem correct to me. Once you have been summoned you have a profile that profile can reduce you chance of getting a second summons all the way down 0% or in some cases a good profile increases you chance of being used again. Its not a 100% random chance. Your profile has to be suitable for the case in question or you will not get used.

For example if you get summoned the first time and they determine you are not suitable for jury service or not suitable for certain types of cases you don't have the same odds of getting a second summons. Likewise there is a high case of people getting summoned young being suitable and getting repeat summons. The odds are not even as its not a 100% chance thing.
Click to expand...
Your "profile" is unaffected by serving jury duty.
 
glen8 said:
am I right in thinking that in our free country, if you are asked for jury service you can't say no?
Click to expand...

Correct. Well you can asked to be deferred but even then someone has to judge whether you have a good enough reason and if they decide it isn't then you have to go.

The first letter I had even mentioned the police being called on me if I refused.

I'm a libertarian so I have a big problem with this. However if people were allowed a completely free choice then Juries would end up being mostly filled by the same types of people which undermines the point of a random jury.

I'm not even convinced the jury system is the best way of determining a verdict anyway but I realise most just accept it is in a sacred cow kind of way.
 
estebanrey said:
Correct. Well you can asked to be deferred but even then someone has to judge whether you have a good enough reason and if they decide it isn't then you have to go.

The first letter I had even mentioned the police being called on me if I refused.

I'm a libertarian so I have a big problem with this. However if people were allowed a completely free choice then Juries would end up being mostly filled by the same types of people which undermines the point of a random jury.

I'm not even convinced the jury system is the best way of determining a verdict anyway but I realise most just accept it is in a sacred cow kind of way.
Click to expand...

I agree

The jury could (although unlikely, still possible) be made up of idiots who don't want to be their and have made their mind up before the trial even begins. They could all vote guilty out of their own personal protest at being their in the first place.
 
estebanrey said:
So you think the judicial system has a big computer scoring people and then basing it's selection process on that?

No. It's a random selection and anyone and everyone who is registered on the same amount of government accessible lists has the same chance of being selected (they do admit though that if you feature on more lists you are more likely to be selected, so someone who holds a UK driving licence and is on the electoral role is more likely to be selected than someone just on the electoral role).

There are no "profiles" and no one scoring your suitability to be on a jury. You are either eligible or you are not and only the latter won't be called, the people in the former group all have the same chance (withstanding the bit above about being on more lists).
Click to expand...


I believe you can be blacklisted if they find out you are a complete idiot, but there is no profiling or anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom