( continues...) examination from the P. The P was pestering on this topic. Puzzling most of us jurors. The D was getting really frustrated. And said it was nothing. He was mad at how the V grabbed the phone from their M, so he grabbed the hone from V, and then threw it out of the way. It was a 2 second, triple possession. No thinking. Just reacting. So in deliberation, foreman said, he felt it was the P piling on the counts. So we took a vote, and came up 11-1 for guilty. Ugg. Almost. So I try and be diplomatic. I say, (paraphrase) "Ok, well, this is an anynomous vote. Given that there is one voting guilty, we will need to hear that persons views. Keep in mind, everyone, we aren't going to be judgemental, we need to be open to this persons concerns. Hear them. And talk about them. Of course, that means, the dissenting vote will need to out themselves...." At which point the one gal said "wait, I think I misunderstood what the vote was. Is grabbing the phone guilty? Because he grabbed the phone. It was part of the fight." So spent a few minutes making sure we all understood that "not guilty" vote meant he grabbed the phone in anger, and "guilty" meant he grabbed the phone with malice to prevent calling the police. And at that vote, we came with 100% not guilty.

We filled out the paperwork. And then I wanted to make sure we were 100%. There were a couple folks who didn't say much in the deliberations. And then a couple confusions in voting. So I wanted to make sure we are all in agreement. And a few of the other jururs agreed, that we need to make sure we are all on the same page, since we are basically voting to send someone to prison for a long time. And we went around the room and concurred with Guilty on the assault charges, and Not Guilty on the preventing reporting a crime.

We call the clerk to inform her, we are ready. Half hour later, we get the call to return to the court room. Clerk reads the verdicts (mispronouncing the D & V names! Repeatedly). D had no reaction. Judge thanked us for our service, and released us back to the jury pool room. There, we got our parking validated, and our certificates for HR. And that was it.

Dunno anyone's name in the jury. Kinda strange. Just spent the better part of 3 days with these people, and I don't know any of their names.

Outside, one of the jurors came up to me. He's a retired chemistry professor. He thanked me. Said I really helped him with the decisions. That the way I kept steering the conversation, to attack each item on a point by point basis. And that step by step determination helped make the decisions.

We all pretty much agreed (no vote, just chatting while filling in the paperwork) that both brothers should really be charged. But we couldn't do anything about it. That once we determined it was Mutual Combat, that the assualt charges fell into place. And the defense "well, he started it", and "well he used it on me first" didn't make him innocent.

Can you tell us how it was decided?

Ha. Long cross post. Yup.

OK, that's the bulk of the case. I'm sure I missed some details. Thankfully I kept my notes, and the vote tallies that I recorded.

On the whole, it was a good experience. I understand why everyone wants to ditch jury duty. Especially if work doesn't pay for it, or dings you vacation or sick days or something. But I found it very interesting. Of course, I do watch a lot of procedural tv shows, and grew up reading murder mystery novels. So, YRMV.

Fascinating. Sounds like you were crucial in getting a decision out of that jury. Good job, you!

We kinda laughed that a plunger is a deadly weapon

What, were there no Doctor Who fans in the room?

What, were there no Doctor Who fans in the room?

unless you mean the Daleks?

[link]

Totally fascinating, omnis. I did jury duty last year and found it hard, and weighty, and emotionally intense, especially the deliberations (everyone at once bone-naked truthful and totally anonymous and having to trust both your own and everyone else's thought process), and you describe all of that so vividly.

It's eerie, and moving, how deeply seriously everyone takes it all once it starts; we all roll our eyes at the the prospect of getting stuck with jury duty but the reality - the gravity of your discussion and your choices being the deciding factors in the course of a total stranger's life - is slightly terrifying.

Fascinating, and upsetting. Jury duty really is an important responsibility. And tough.

Also, as an aside as M, I am glad I never allowed the boys to get physical with each other in fights. The boys will be boys thing is complete crap to me, and I heard it way too often. No, violence is never acceptable. A great number of 'friends' have suggested that what boys need is to be pummeled by dad on occasion too. Um NO, not ever under any circumstances. Way too many people seem to think that violence is somehow normal behavior, and I just don't get or accept that.

Often sitting alone in the extreme pacifist corner. And somehow my bestie is a HUGE boxing fan. I keep trying to explain to her that my issue is that they hit each other. We go out for drinks at the sports bar on Friday night and sit with her facing the boxing screen and me facing baseball or something. We accept that we will never understand each other. But we won't fight about it!!!

Way too many people seem to think that violence is somehow normal behavior, and I just don't get or accept that.

For way too many people, violence IS normal behavior. Someone grows up with it, it's normal, and they see people who avoid it as being weak. I know a bunch of people like that, including most of my family. One of the many reasons I left and never went back. I'm over here in the pacifist corner with you, Laura.