From what I remember from the jury selection (I was a juror in a civil suit), it was pretty easy to be eliminated if you weren't ashamed of it. We had one guy who got testy with the lawyers asking questions. He answered one question and when it looked like he was done the lawyer continued. Then he interupted the lawyer all pissed off and said he didn't appreciate being interupted in the middle of saying something (which he obviously wasn't). He was just generally a jerk everytime he opened his mouth. He was eliminated to everyone's relief. Another guy answered questions with radical answers. When asked what rights a worker should have vis-a-vis his employer, he said that the company should be able to do whatever they wanted with their workers and that no one -- not even the government -- should have anything to say about it. I think what those 2 did was pretty despicable. At the time I didn't want to be picked for jury duty either. But, I couldn't bring myself to lie about what I thought or be discourteous to anyone. I doubt anyone that was enpanelled actually wanted to serve but most had enough self-respect and respect for the court to not sabotage the system like that.
Just for the record, JV, the 2nd guy really could have just had radical beliefs. For example, I really do believe that companies should be allowed to do just about anything to workers and that workers should leave if they don't like it. Sure that makes me a radical but I wouldn't be a despicable liar if I answered a question like that in a jury selection.
Duly noted: the guy could have been a radical. I don't think I can properly convey the overall feel of the selection, but I really felt -- from the way he answered this question and a few others -- that he was more of a despicable liar than a libertarian zealot. Not that he was saying things he didn't at all believe, but that he radicalized his opinions in his reponses because he knew one side or the other wouldn't be pleased with him if he were sufficiently far afield. While I'm here, I should mention one more guy, one who did make the jury. He was an old Mexican guy who did have genuine radical notions for which he probably should have been eliminated. He felt that the defendant (who was Mexican) was being persecuted by the white majority and that the court's instructions were essentially designed to maintain that persecution and therefore should be ignored. He was a man who had a lot of presence and he greatly swayed the opinions of many of the jurors. In fact, he won in the end and the defendant won the suit (to be fair, he did have a good argument). So, Old School, though you don't really seem the type, if you are that type, I'd rather you weaseled out of it then if you went in and tried to subvert the court to achieve some social agenda.
Maybe i shouldnt register to vote, so then i wont have to do jury duty. Isnt it weird that everyone that has responed to this post are all senior members?
I hate to tell you this Sonics, but voter registration isn't the only way they get you. In Illinois, I know they use 9 different government sources, including drivers licenses.
