Jury Service (Do NOT turn this into a 'how to get out of jury service' thread)

[Tefal]

There is a difference between having an opinion of a person, to your opinion if that person is guilty.

They could be scumbags, thats a personal opinion as you describe in this post. It is not however the same thing to say they are guilty.

Logically, if he cannot be found guilty by reasonable doubt,then saying he is guilty is unreasonable. Right?

An equal example would be you saying the guy is drunk, not he looks like a drunk.

If you are in the wrong place and the wrong time, you look guilty, not, you are guilty. There is a big difference.

I will stop responding as i dont know how many ways i can re-phrase this.

Ahhhh on i see the problem here.

Humans often communicate in funny ways, it's not a perfect black and white literal thing like you're making out.

"Guilty as hell" doesn't mean "guilty beyond all reasonable doubt as proven in a court of law". It means "I personally think they're guilty + emphasis".

Hope that helps you.

then saying he is guilty is unreasonable. Right?

To who?

 

[platinum87]

Ahhhh on i see the problem here.

Humans often communicate in funny ways, it's not a perfect black and white literal thing like you're making out.

"Guilty as hell" doesn't mean "guilty beyond all reasonable doubt as proven in a court of law". It means "I personally think they're guilty + emphasis".

Hope that helps you.



To who?

At first i thought you saw the problem but apparently not.

To get it you'd need to change ...It means "I personally think they're guilty + emphasis".

to

It means "I personally think they're probably guilty + emphasis".

 

[dowie]

You are saying the defendants are guilty as hell in your last jury service, while also saying there is not enough evidence.

If there is not enough evidence, then how are they guilty as hell?

He's just using "guilty as hell" as an expression, bit of hyperbole, perhaps @fez thinks they're likely to be guilty essentially but that there wasn't sufficient evidence and the defence could demonstrate some reasonable doubt.

Perhaps they heard some stuff in court that they were later instructed to disregard for whatever reason. Maybe they'd have found the defendants guilty but for the judge's instructions that they need to be satisfied of X, Y and Z etc..

 

[Tefal]

At first i thought you saw the problem but apparently not.

To get it you'd need to change ...It means "I personally think they're guilty + emphasis".

to

It means "I personally think they're probably guilty + emphasis".

No because he doesn't think they're probably guilty he thinks they are.


But I really do have to ask given all the context is this you're legitimately having trouble understanding what he said, or are you feigning you couldn't comprehend for whatever reasons?

 

[jon86]

I've not had to do jury duty in the UK as the CPS doesn't want to pay for my flight and hotel.

I've not been invited to participate in jury duty in the USA either.

 

[Craterloads]

Just finished jury service, feel mentally fatigued, was so hard (well the guilty or not bit)

was super interesting first 4 days going to court and seeing how the whole process works. Judge was really nice older woman who you could tell was firm but fair. A lot and a mean a lot of procedural stuff that is a bit of a pain. Would definitely recommend people to give it a go it’s worth while experience rather than trying to get out of it.

we had a rape case, but was super complicated so got thrown into the deep end with a full graphic video we got shown as soon as we got in there!

really suprised how hard it is to get a conviction, burden of proof is incredibly high.

 

[Malevolence]

we had a rape case

My second case was a rape case, the first one was a child abuse case.

 

[Craterloads]

My second case was a rape case, the first one was a child abuse case.

feel for ya, I only had the one and thankfully have been dismissed.

 

[Deleted member 77746]

I didn’t even no this was a thing wtf have I been asleep for the whole of my life.

Some people who have been selected need to watch this video especially when the presenter talks about not discussing ANYTHING with ANYONE otherwise I’m going to have to suggest you are all GUILTY.

https://www.gov.uk/jury-service

 

[Semple]

I didn’t even no this was a thing wtf have I been asleep for the whole of my life.

Lol how did you think jury service worked?

 

[Deleted member 77746]

Lol how did you think jury service worked?

I actually have no idea how it actually worked worked, never knew it was people actually standing up to give a verdict. I’m going to be totally honest here. I’m intrigued now it’s been mentioned though.

I think it’s the been called up part that scares me the most. Not having a clue how things work but been given the power to destroy a life for a long time. Hmm.

 

[Craterloads]

I actually have no idea how it actually worked worked, never knew it was people actually standing up to give a verdict. I’m going to be totally honest here. I’m intrigued now it’s been mentioned though.

I think it’s the been called up part that scares me the most. Not having a clue how things work but been given the power to destroy a life for a long time. Hmm.

you don’t, you select a foreman who speaks for the group on the verdict the group has decided. No one apart from the other jurors knows what you voted for and that is secret for life.

the foreman just replies to questions asked by someone in the court regarding the charges, guilty or not and by what majority.

everyone is in the same position so not as bad as you think, the ushers pretty much hold your hand the whole way taking you where you need to go and explaining everything. They are very good at what they do.

The power over someone’s life is what changed our verdict to be fair which I thought was wrong. I just might be a cold person in that regard but the tears of the defendant affected our jury to change positions half way through. That’s why some will select trial by jury as the jurors are a lot more human and easy to sow a seed of doubt or play on their emotions.

After this experience I now know why rape convictions are so low. We literally had a good quality tape (modern phone) of the defendant recording himself abusing his unconscious limp partner for a good 5 minutes, completely unresponsive and still somehow he’s managed to get off not guilty on all charges. I feel a bit sick thinking about it today.

 

[Jean-F]

I actually have no idea how it actually worked worked, never knew it was people actually standing up to give a verdict. I’m going to be totally honest here. I’m intrigued now it’s been mentioned though.

I think it’s the been called up part that scares me the most. Not having a clue how things work but been given the power to destroy a life for a long time. Hmm.

I’m mildly surprised that you didn’t know that a jury trial ends with the judge asking the jury if they’ve reached a verdict, then asking the foreman to give that verdict, but I can appreciate nagging doubts about affecting a defendant’s life.
I only did jury service once, a long time back, and after hearing a case where a guy was accused of stealing books from a well known bookstore in London’s Piccadilly AND threatening a security guard with a hypodermic needle, we filed into the jury room and a well spoken man among us said, “Any thoughts before we take a quick poll?”
A middle aged woman said, “I’ll go with the flow, let’s get it done with.”
Made my blood run cold, the evidence suggested that the guy was guilty, but this woman just wanted to hurry up and say so, so that she could get home.
I think that maybe prospective jurors should be given a short test to establish their intelligence, or lack of, rather like TV quiz show contestants are weeded out with a few questions to make sure that they at least know their name before they go on camera.

 

[englishpremier]

After this experience I now know why rape convictions are so low. We literally had a good quality tape (modern phone) of the defendant recording himself abusing his unconscious limp partner for a good 5 minutes, completely unresponsive and still somehow he’s managed to get off not guilty on all charges. I feel a bit sick thinking about it today.

The jury could have decided whatever they wanted. Regardless of burden. I guess it's up to each juror to choose what they want to believe in and what burden they decided place despite what might be recommended to them.

Speaking of jury service. I was called up recently, but being abroad I was unable to do my service. Not sure how that will work out, as I'm sure they will want me next year, where I may well be abroad again. I've barely in the UK over past 5-7 years. Normally off hopping from country to country.

 

[Craterloads]

The jury could have decided whatever they wanted. Regardless of burden. I guess it's up to each juror to choose what they want to believe in and what burden they decided place despite what might be recommended to them.

Some of our lot seemed to struggle with the word "sure" the judge used and even said it doesnt take on a magical meaning when used in court. Some took that as 100% or nothing.

Regardless its a lot tougher and a lot more pressure than most can stomach. We had one person who went from guilty to not guilty simply because he saw the defendant crying.

 

[englishpremier]

Some of our lot seemed to struggle with the word "sure" the judge used and even said it doesnt take on a magical meaning when used in court. Some took that as 100% or nothing.

Regardless its a lot tougher and a lot more pressure than most can stomach. We had one person who went from guilty to not guilty simply because he saw the defendant crying.

Sounds tough. I'm hoping when I go it's a complex financial fraud case or similar. I'm more interested in that stuff. Not that I get to choose of course.

 

[Deleted member 77746]

I’m mildly surprised that you didn’t know that a jury trial ends with the judge asking the jury if they’ve reached a verdict, then asking the foreman to give that verdict, but I can appreciate nagging doubts about affecting a defendant’s life.

I have never been involved with such a thing, not seen any programs really about it either so took no notice in depth. Was never sure how it all worked but now I do.

you don’t, you select a foreman who speaks for the group on the verdict the group has decided. No one apart from the other jurors knows what you voted for and that is secret for life.

oh I see. Damn sounds tuff!

 

[Tefal]

I’m mildly surprised that you didn’t know that a jury trial ends with the judge asking the jury if they’ve reached a verdict, then asking the foreman to give that verdict, but I can appreciate nagging doubts about affecting a defendant’s life.
I only did jury service once, a long time back, and after hearing a case where a guy was accused of stealing books from a well known bookstore in London’s Piccadilly AND threatening a security guard with a hypodermic needle, we filed into the jury room and a well spoken man among us said, “Any thoughts before we take a quick poll?”
A middle aged woman said, “I’ll go with the flow, let’s get it done with.”
Made my blood run cold, the evidence suggested that the guy was guilty, but this woman just wanted to hurry up and say so, so that she could get home.
I think that maybe prospective jurors should be given a short test to establish their intelligence, or lack of, rather like TV quiz show contestants are weeded out with a few questions to make sure that they at least know their name before they go on camera.

Did you report what she said?

As I'd have guessed that self reporting by the other jurors was the test?

 

[Deleted member 77746]

Did you report what she said?

As I'd have guessed that self reporting by the other jurors was the test?

You not supposed to talk about it.

 

[Tefal]

You not supposed to talk about it.

To random folk on the street sure but the usher/judge/balif/court