No, i've been on a few juries.

I did get the notice to go about 7 or 8 years ago. I got out of it because I am a SAHM and I had three toddlers at the time. JD would have caused a hardship for my family. If it didn't cause a hardship, I'd willingly go. I'm not sure they would want me once I got there.

No - I look forward to getting jury duty notifications. Never been chosen to sit on a case though

I have been summoned twice but never served. First time I was due to give birth to my sixth child in a week, the second time my husband had been the reporter who wrote the newspaper stories about the doctor involved in a wrongful death malpractice suit. I knew all about the case because I read all my hub's articles, and this was a very interesting case. The lawyers were worried about "pillow talk" between us, and they had all his stories right there.

Yes, of course I would served if called. I am sure it would be difficult to judge another, but I think I would be a thoughtful, conscientious juror.

I "did" get out of jury duty one time. Our son had just been born and I was excused. I have never been called since, but I would be glad to serve. My husband was called on a murder case one time...they found the man innocent because there just wasn't enough evidence against him. My husband felt he was probably guilty, but "probably" isn't what you are supposed to go by.

I believe it is every American citizen's responsibility to serve on a jury if called.

Have been called may times (we generally get a summons every 2-3 years in this county); have had to report maybe 8-10 times, have been picked for a couple of juries. Nothing too exciting, they were just run of the mill cases.

100 jurors? I imagine you MUST have been surprised. How could they seat an impartial jury from so few? We generally have between 800-1000 jurors report each day, about 50-60 are sent up to whatever courtroom is starting a new case, and it often takes a few of those groups to seat a full jury. After which, if you're not chosen, you head back to the jury assembly room in the basement and await the call for the next panel for the next case. Unfortunately, about a year ago, I was picked for a case that sounded very interesting, but I had an important appt. with a specialist during the time the trial would have been in session, and the judge excused me. Would have loved to serve, but it didn't work out that time.

Unless picked for a jury, you only have to report the one day. And hey--you get $12 a day? Wow--that's a fortune! We get $5, and they've stopped paying mileage. On top of that, the county seat is the most violent city in the country, so we have the added spice of danger when we serve.

Like you, I enjoy all the ins and outs of the legal system and enjoy seeing and being involved with the process.

I would love to serve on a jury. I've been summoned several times, but have been unlucky. Twice, the cases were settled; once, I had moved to another county; once, I failed voir dire because I had a relative in law enforcement. I was called for the big savings and loan case in 1988 (a 5-month case), but my boss said I couldn't be spared.

I did serve on a grand jury in 2003 and loved it! There were a variety of cases, including one first-degree murder case. I haven't been called since then.

I've been called a number of times, and served on two VERY interesting cases. The first was a pedophile who abducted a kid, when he found out he had a little boy, and not a girl, he made the kid get out of the car several miles from the kids home. I've always shuddered to think of what would have happened if it HAD been a little girl. The other case was a drug case with undercover officers testifying, it was just like one sees on TV. I've been called several times in the past few years, but I'm 75 and would have to travel 40 miles round trip to the court house, so I've asked to be excused. I think if a US citizen is asked to serve, they should if at all possible. But there are legitimate reasons to not serve.

I've only had to serve once and that was enough for me. I don't find it interesting anymore because of my job but I konw that it is necessary. If it is a criminal case, I'd be likely be excused. When I served the one time it was a civil case.

I've been called to JD numerous times. I've served on a couple of juries. They were very interesting. My job paid me my full salary, so serving was not a financial hardship. I was called last month, but deferred to January because of a scheduling conflict. I'm looking forward to it.

Would love to serve on one.
First time called I was a nursing mother.
Second time, I was in Florida at the time.
Third time, I called the night before and the case had apparently settled and I was excused.
Kathy G in MI

I've been called several times and have served with the exception of the last one. I got a doctor's excuse due to the fact that I had an inflamed hip joint at the time and sitting for long periods would have been unbearable. Now that I'm over 75 I don't think I'll be called again.

I served on several juries when I was working. I really enjoyed the cases and seeing the legal system from the inside. But now I'm sick and on dialysis three times a week and on a kidney transplant list so I couldn't serve. I'm only 59 so I might get ccalled. One time I was called I said I couldn't serve because I had two children under ten.

I've been summoned several times but never served due to different reasons, settled before getting a jury, knew the Dr. associated with a murder case and can't remember the others as it was over 35 years ago.

Funny how I've received numerous summons and DH only one and that was to serve on one 300 mi. away and he was excused. Have talked to other persons that have never been called for jury duty. Think I'm beyond the age to call anymore and wouldn't be able to sit very long before I would have to have a bathroom break.

I have been summoned numerous times..but the one that stands out most in my mind was a criminal case where the lady was charged with DUI & Vehicular homicide.

They had 5 witnesses who identified the three people who got out of the car after the accident, but none of them could confirm who was driving.

Immediately after the wreck all three women ran to a nearby bar to use a phone to call police...while in the bar they each had two or three quick drinks before the police arrived.

We deliberated for 7 hours before reaching our verdict.

1. The bartender confirmed that each of the ladies had three drinks.

2. No one could confirm who was actually driving the car at the time of the accident.

3. Both a doctor and the police officer said that the alcohol test was positive because they had just finished drinking three drinks, but no one could prove they were under the influence before the accident occured.

4. A witness confirmed that the car they hit had in fact run a red light and it was an unavoidable accident on the part of the driver at trial.

Based upon the evidence presented in the trial we could not in good conscience say they were guilty beyond a doubt, so we had no choice but to vote "Not Guilty"

As we returned to the courtroom the judge asked if we had a verdict and the foreman said "Yes".

The judge then said, "You may publish the verdict", but before the foreman could speak, the defense attorney shouts, "A moment your honor"

Judge says Okay, and the defense attorney says, "My client would like to change her plea to guilty and go on the mercy of the court"

If she had remained silent for another minute she would have walked,....I guess there really is justice in this world.......LOL

Yes, I've done it once. Our city calls 350 people a week and about 250 show up. I was shocked to see so many people. The first morning I was sent upstairs (with 59 others) to start voir dire. It was terrible, the attorneys interviewed each of us individually, but in-front of everyone to decide who was being selected for the case. Voir dire took 4 days, sitting in the most uncomfortable chairs ever. It also took forever because the judge was also seeing other cases on his docket.

I was ultimately selected. The trial lasted 3 weeks. Everyday we had to report at 8am, but the trial usually started around 11, then lunch a noon. It was such a waste of time.

The trial took so long because the attorney's were objecting constantly, then they would go "off the record", go into a little room with the judge and court reporter for 5 - 20 minutes, then come back out and start again.

I never realized how much goes on before & behind the scenes. Most of our time was spent in the jury room while they would prepare. Also, the jury I sat on had all of our local news stations and cameras there reporting since it was a famous local evening news anchor involved. So before the jury was brought out, the cameras were all set up, things were on the chalk board, the bicycle of the deceased was propped up by the jury box etc.

The most difficult part for us was that we could only use what we heard in testimony to make our guilty or innocent verdict. We couldn't drive by the scene of the accident, we couldn't test things or research anything on our own. We could only use what the lawyers decided to present (or not present). And that was the worst. I knew there was SO much being left out.

Turns out this was the second trial, the first one was a hung jury. They didn't tell us that...

And our jury was hung also. There were so many loop-holes and "what if's" that some of us couldn't say he was 100% guilty.

We went to the judge 3 times saying we were hung, and he kept sending us back to the jury room to deliberate. (Which took 3 days). Everyone finally, except for one person was willing to meet 1/2 way with manslaughter. But that one person on the jury stuck by his innocent vote and refused to change. So we gave up. Another hung jury.

Oh, we got $20 a day (no mileage). But it took 6 weeks for them to send us the check. Some people could't serve because they didn't pay right away. Some people got off the jury selection because they couldn't sit on a long trial, but they still had to sit for a week.

Over-all, I'm glad I did it. But it really wasn't what I expected. It was mostly "hurry up and wait". The exciting stuff I see on TV really only lasted an hour a day, if that.

OH, and the worst part was human feelings and emotion. And the judge kept telling us not to think of it that way, don't imagine the sentence. Just think "guilty or not guilty". But there was a real person sitting there everyday, with his family there. I realize a lot of things are done for show, but sometimes it really works; especially when they do a good job at jury selection.

I'm still friends with 3 of the jurors; as everyone gets really close everyday. We followed our case as there was a 3rd trial. The guy ended up confessing partially way through the 3rd trial. Which made us feel like idiots.

Personally, I didn't think he was completely innocent, but not completely guilty. And that's what they relied on.
What an experience....

I've been called many times in many different jurisdictions in California. Different counties select the pool differently, so I have sat most of a day or been dismissed the day before and only once made it to the courtroom. I was the first to be excused that time, but it was an interesting case and I did have some knowledge of it. Now I am handicapped and cannot hear well enough, and over 70, so I don't get called. Too often, in my experience, there are more women and older women called to serve than men; and I am not sure that is what was meant as a 'jury of peers'. And, now, with this high unemployment problem, I wonder if our jury selection process has become a 'jury of the poor'.

I have heard suggestions recently, that perhaps we should have a different method of selecting jurors, and wonder it that isn't something that will happen in the future. The way it is done now must not be effecient or cost effective or even "fair" in too many instnces. Just wondering!

BTW DH has never been called during his working life and only once since he has retired. And we have always registered to vote(assuming that is where the get names) and usually had the same address and DMV registration.

Got called once, but work would not release me and also my supervisor's husband was in law enforcement as was my hubby. Hubby got called three times back here, but could not do it due to cancer treatments. Now he is too old to drive the distance they require and sit. There are many people that would be good if they were allowed to serve.

If I wasn't working I would go. Years ago I was summoned but I was stationed in Germany at the time. Would have been hard for me to fly back to NV. Then got a summons after I started working at my current job, we are always short staffed so I requested not to serve again. I would have to do it again, as we are down to 7 nurses on each shift. We just had two more give their notice.

My husband served once and I served twice. The first one was settled out of court. The second one was for a grand jury. We had to decide if there was enough evidence to take it to court. WE decided yes. I will be on the grand jury for a year. This is only the second time in 125 years they have called a grand jury so I probably wont have to go again. No i wouldn refuse to go though

I'm including a couple of quotes from Pawprint's post.

Voir dire took 4 days, sitting in the most uncomfortable chairs ever.

This is a concern for me. Fibromyalgia makes it difficult for me to sit for long periods of time--20 minutes is about my maximum without a break. (This is one reason why I loved being a reporter--always on the go--and working in the library.)

The most difficult part for us was that we could only use what we heard in testimony to make our guilty or innocent verdict. We couldn't drive by the scene of the accident, we couldn't test things or research anything on our own. We could only use what the lawyers decided to present (or not present). And that was the worst. I knew there was SO much being left out.

I'm sure I'd find this wildly frustrating! I've been reading mysteries and police procedurals my whole life, and I can just see myself sitting there, silently willing the prosecuting attorney to ask my questions. (Good luck with that, Susan. LOL)

I got excused many years ago because I had three small children at home. My dad once told me that his father always wanted to serve on a jury, but never got called.

Susan

Would I try to get out of it....ABSOLUTELY!

Did I ever serve on one.....Yes

How did it affect my life?...Let's see:

i got paid $17 a day to go to the court but it cost me $25 a day for the train ride, parking at the train station and lunch.

Sorry but I lost money on going to jury duty. Although I voted not guilty for the guy because I thought the police officer was lying through his teeth.

BTW...I know the trick that works for me in getting out of it. Just have a good head & chest cold and sit by the prosecutor/defense attys table. Of course ever since I took my name off the voting list I have not been called.

SamKaren
your resident DJ

I love serving jury duty. I wish I'd get called again.

DH was called twice but I've never been called. I would not try to get out of it, but, I would have no financial hardship because work would pay me full pay anyway. I'd like to think I'd still try to serve even if I didn't have that employment benefit, but it's hard to say. I would find the process to be very interesting. I don't think they would have me though, because of my health.

No, I would not try to weasle out of jury duty even though it might be tough to take. I feel it is my civic duty and I don't get called very often. I've been called only once in the last 36 years and did not serve on that call because one week after the notice, I was moving out of the county. I would have served if required, but was dismissed because my residency was changing.

I've not been called so far, but no, I wouldn't try to get out of it.

I have both served and have asked for and was granted dismissal. But, when you are self-employed as I am, it's a no-brainer. I can't afford to loose customers, so as long as I work for myself, I will continue to get out of it. Otherwise, I would serve.

I always wanted to serve on a major case though, mainly for the education and experience.

I've been called 3 times in 28 years and had to be excused each time - the first time I had a 1 week old infant, the second time I was the sole care giver for my Father and he couldn't be left alone.

The only time I was called and actually went they excused me because of DH's profession and the nature of the case. When the judge excused me I asked if there was any way I could volunteer to serve on a different jury because I honestly believe it's our duty - he chuckled and said no but that he wished more people felt that way.

I've been called several times but only served once. It was a pretty straighforward case invoving a nurses aide allegedly injured in a 2-car traffic accident. I commuted into the city for days. It took forever because the judge had terminal cancer. He could only sit an hour in the morning and an hour after lunch, and sometimes we were dismissed after lunch.

I felt bad to read the verdict because we all believed the plaintif might have had a case. Her young ambulance-chaser attorneys were relying on sympathy, and failed to prove their case. The defense attorney was a savvy young woman, acting for an insurance company. She'd 'been around the block'. Her opening statment reminded the jury of our duty to examine the *facts*!

DH has been called a few times. He sat on one jury where a trucking company's lawyer made hash of the plaintif's attorney.

Neither of us has been called since we moved out of Cook County. It would be a lot easier to get to court from here than to go into Chicago!

Court is a good place to observe money at work. An overworked young prosecutor doesn't stand a chance against a big-money defense attorney. I sat with a friend for weeks at the murder trial of a man who had killed her husband, stabbing him more than a dozen times after going to his apartment to accost him. The accused's wealthy new wife hired the biggest guns in Chicago to defend him. He walked. The accused's first wife died mysteriously prior to this murder and was instantly cremated by him. He took four strong prescription drugs for anxiety for months before the crime. (None of this was heard by the jury, of course.)

YES! Your intelligence is sorely needed in court!

As a friend of mine says, I'm on their speed dial. I've gotten called a LOT of times. Several of those times it was when I was a student or SAHM so I never went even though I always wanted to. Then finally I got called when I could go and I went. And I got picked. And it was horrible.

It was a case of child abuse involving the sexual abuse of three children by mom's bf with the knowledge, acceptance and partial participation by the mom. We had to hear the most excruciating testimony, some of which still haunts me, and this was something like 18 or 19 years ago.

The next time I got called, about two years later, it was a case of a boyfriend holding a gun on his girlfriend. I guess it was just too soon after the last time but I did not want to hear any gory details about their relationship. So I spoke up and said that I could not convict someone based on "his word against hers" and they let me go.

After that I served on a jury for a drug case where I learned all about street terminology and how to tell if a drug deal is about to go down. The case was fine but there was one woman on the jury who was an attention seeker and she made us spend an inordinate amount of time getting her to agree to the verdict and sentence. Ugh.

The third case I served on was in municipal court. We handed down a verdict of guilty with maximum fine on a speeding ticket. We all wanted to throw the guy in jail or at least give him a bigger fine for wasting all of our time. The lawyer asked a lot of stupid questions. Repeatedly. And the place where the guy got caught is a notorious speed trap. What a pain!

Oh well. If (when) they call me again, I'll go. And serve if picked. I just don't need to be privy to the horrors that go on in people's homes so please, no more cases like that!

I have been called, but never got past the waiting room.
However, with my ex husband being a police officer, I went to a couple trials that he testified in.
The one that sticks out was a woman that he arrested for sexual child abuse charges.
The laws are very specific for police when they arrive at a scene....they are almost forced to arrest first and sort out later.
The accused woman was a friend of the mother. The mother used this poor girl as a babysitter so her and her other friends could party. (the accused was a portly, unnattractive girl, not real bright, that seemed starved for friends)
Apparently the accused was giving the 2 year old a bath and afterwards told her mother he peepee hurt. It somehow unfolded that the accused fondled her(I speculate it was soap and the "friends" were tired of her hanging around) There was a doctor that tesified that there was no evidence of penetration.

I sat in on the jury trial....the one part that never came out was that the accused girl was only at the house as a babysitter - the other were smoking pot when all this supposedly happened.

The accused had a public defender and he was absolutely terrible - he treated her as bad as her "friends". The prosecution barely had to present anything. It was a joke. The whole trial took less than 3 hours. My ex and I were both appalled, but there is very little he could do other than answer the questions he was asked. She was sentenced to something like 6 years and of course will carry that label for life.

In PA - and I am sure other states as well - the jury is not allowed to take notes or ask questions. That alone makes me not want to serve. I believe that a trial should be based on more than how committed a lawyer is the case.