Gothamist: Making Jury Duty Nicer For New Yorkers?

Sokkor LeVine

Tue, 22 Jun 2004 14:52:43 -0500

last time i satjury duty that silly woman from "the kicker" who used to edit gawker was there are well. she blogged the whole damn time as they already have wifi hotspots up and running in the grand jury holding room here in nyc.

Cubicle Cowboy

Tue, 22 Jun 2004 14:04:59 -0500

It's heartening to see that someone noticed, after all this time, that the process is not taylored to get good jurors to attend. People hate the system so much they use elaborate schemes to get out of it. Who is left? Those that have nothing better to do, cant be bothered to get out of it or have jobs they dislike so much they PREFER jury duty. I was called in for a civil case at LA County Court House. Everything about the process is broken. Parking is complicated where you have to run receipts all around to various windows, the form you get is typical of county paperwork, vaguely threatening and mostly unintelligable. There was an internet terminal (fee based) but it was partially destroyed. It may have been in the gorilla cage at the zoo before finding a quiet resting place in the BRIGHT AS HELL neon lit lounge that smelled vaguely of bo and stale coffee. A long 4 hours later a cracked and disembodied voice emated from the 1950's blown duct-taped overhead speaker telling us we could all go. It took me about 30 seconds to translate the message as it sounded more like the train conductor telling us the next stop would be Flatbush avenue and we could transfer. If NYC wants to do it right, they need to bring in someone who never worked for a municipal body before. Efficiency in the system saves people time, money and may even not scare off the people who would make good jurors. In reality, the delivery will more likely be a few minor improvements but the basic crap infrastructure will stay the same.

abby

Tue, 22 Jun 2004 12:06:31 -0500

Usually, jury duty is a complete waste of time because you go through voir dire, get selected for a jury, spend all this time and THEN the case settles just before trial - or sometimes during the trial. (This happened to me several years back on a civil case, in which I was on a jury with Marla Maples Trump, that settled before it went to trial.) Anyway, that's one reason why potential jurors view the system cynically -- because it's all a bunch of back-room deals and jurors feel like their time is wasted. Also, you have to get there by a certain time -- sit and wait. Then something might happen, then a 2.5-hour lunch break -- come back (going thru security AGAIN) -- and then you're dismissed an hour and a half later. I can understand that justice is not always swift, but does it have to be so damn inefficient?

joeq

Tue, 22 Jun 2004 08:52:35 -0500

people should be allowed to be excused from jury duty if � and only if � they solemnly vow to never complain about the outcome of any trial. don't like how the oj thing worked out? too f'ing bad. think that scott peterson got off easy? sorry - you should've served. it's like voting - be a part of the process or keep your mouth shut.

ugarte

Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:41:56 -0500

The first postponement is automatic; the second can be tricky. With no job to avoid and a book to read, jury duty was a snap.