Jury Service, a Patriotic Civic Duty
This is a Patriot’s Journey post. Remember to check out the other Patriotic Journeyers: Drumwaster, The Bastage and the folks at The Line Is Here…
Throughout history, patriotism and the fulfillment of duty have been considered among the highest virtues. Perhaps the highest virtues.
In the Iliad, Achilles was angry at Agamemnon and thought that the war wasn’t worth his effort. However, in the end, he completed his duty, rising to the call and going into battle for Greece.
The central theme of the Aeneid was Aeneas’s sacrifice for duty. He abandoned all of his personal desires to fulfill his duty to his country, to establish a new empire.
The civilizations to which we owe our modern thought, to which we owe our own civilization, all praised patriotism and fulfillment of duty. Yet today, some say that dissent is patriotic, that duty should not be required, that when duty interferes with personal interests or beliefs, it should be ignored.
I’ll agree that dissent is required in some cases, but too often it walks a fine line with treason. I’m instead aligned with the seers of old, with Homer and Virgil, with the civilizations that generated our modern society. I’m a patriot and try to be a responsible citizen.
So I was disappointed when a few of my fellow citizens grumbled and complained as we assembled Tuesday morning for jury duty in one of the two upstairs courtrooms in the historic old Placerville courthouse. Some completed “hardship” forms requesting they be excused for reasons little more than trivial inconveniences. Some, I’d wager, didn’t even show up.
Veal calves! Whiny slackers, unwilling to disrupt their daily routines for civic service. Not very patriotic and certainly not civic minded. Homer and Virgil would be ashamed of them. I know I was.
But most were ready to do their duty. Good citizens. Patriots. I didn’t want the slackers on my jury anyway.
Our criminal justice system, for all its flaws, is based on an amazing concept: that no one man or government agency can adequately and fairly judge a person charged with a crime. Instead, our founders conceived the notion that only our fellow citizens could be so entrusted.
Journalist and author Stephen J. Adler wrote, “The American system of trial by jury is unique. No other nation relies so heavily on ordinary citizens to make its most important decisions about law, business practice, and personal liberty — even death. Ideally, Americans take their participation seriously lest they someday stand before their peers seeking justice.”
We live in an amazing country reliant on a brilliantly conceived system of self government. If ever I find myself on trial, I hope it’s in an American court of law where I’ll be thanking my lucky stars that my future will be determined, not by bureaucrats, but by a citizen jury of my peers. I just pray they’ll be the patriots that take the job seriously and not the whiny slackers who tried, unsuccessfully, to get out of it.
Doug
17 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (17)
I do not shrug civic responsibility, but I do take exception with the way jury duty is assigned and managed (by government, so I shouldn't expect efficiency). Why, for example, are 75 or more citizens summoned when, in most cases, no more than a quarter to a third will be selected to sit on a jury? And, in the case of the so-called "one day, one trial" system, must the majority of those summoned (but not selected on the first pass) be forced to idly entertain themselves within the confines of the court for the remainder of the day "in case" more jurors are needed for subsequent trials? It seems a colossal waste of citizen's time for the convenience of court personnel and explains why so many simply ignore their summons.
We use the "one day one trial" system in El Dorado County so I understand your question. For those unfamiliar, it means that prospective jurors are summoned for the full day to be assigned as needed for whatever trials may be scheduled during that day. Many are either excused by one of the attorneys or spend the entire day without being selected for a trial at all. Those seated for a trial are there for its duration. Those not seated by the end of the day are considered to have fulfilled their civic duty for, in the case of El Dorado County, 12 months.
One could argue that summoning only enough jurors (plus reserves) for each scheduled trial and having them report, say, one hour before their assigned trial for orientation would be more efficient and would more fairly consider the schedules of prospective jurors. I don't disagree. But I suspect the system was devised by court personnel to maximize their own convenience and that of judges and attorneys. The efficient consideration of jurors' time, I suspect, is of lower priority.
I don't mind serving, but I'd prefer being summoned for a 2:00 trial at 1:00.
It is a cattle call. A large herd is corraled first thing in the morning so that a cowboy can later brand a few. If he does, he wanders out to the corral, selects the ones he wants, and brands them, leaving the others in the corral all day for other cowboys who may want to brand some later on. During the day, several of the remaining cows get branded and several don't. Cowboys come and go as they please while the cows are confined to the corral. By the end of the day, the cowboys head to town to shoot up the saloon so the cows who weren't needed for branding are set free (for a year).
PETA would call this cavalier treatment of cows inhumane. We need PETJ!
PETJ (People for the Ethical Treatment of Jurors). I love it!
I agree with Gary's analogy. The system is arranged so as to be convenient for the judges and lawyers (who btw don't have to show up until their case is scheduled to be heard) with no consideration for prospective jurors who must languish, many all day, for a time when and if the lawyers need them.
Jurors get paid little for their time because "participating" is their civic duty. And no one cares about their time. No wonder people gripe or don't show up. They are being treated like second class citizens. It is a wonder any of them show up.
You know, if they gave us a comfortable lounge to wait in with a little space between you and the smelly guy beside you, it wouldn't be so bad. One of those push button cappucino coffee machines would help. And a TV, and maybe some magazines. AND WiFi so you could get a little work done while you wait. Then it wouldn't be so bad. The last time I had jury duty, some people actually fell asleep in the chairs!! How boring is that?
The lawyers, judges, witnesses and employees all have access to some of that stuff. At least they are comfortable. Why not jurors?
I speak for the whiners and complainers. Some of us lose wages when we have jury duty and the court doesn't pay our bills. My union contract doesn't pay for jury duty. I have to use my vacation or personal time and if I have to sit around all day for nothing, my family has to sacrifice something. With money so tight right now, it is tough for me to spend time off the clock. I always have to make up something so they will let me off. My family comes first.
Perhaps a system that allows you to volunteer for jury duty when you register for your political party would be appropriate. Those that volunteer are called. Those that do not, are not.
Party registration would be an annual requirement.
That way, those that wish to change their political alliance or their standing on jury duty have the opportunity to do so. The others, not so inclined would neither be pressed nor threatened by local authorities for participating in something that they have no interest in. Just a thought.
Riley: My family comes first.
Pretty selfish and narcissistic. Doesn't everyone's? You think you are the only one losing pay when they serve on a jury? You think someone else should shoulder your civic duty because things are tough for you but not for them? You think no one else has some place they would rather be?
They call it civic duty for a reason. Because it is a responsibility. It isn't easy or convenient or something to get paid for (if it was, there would be government jurors which would defeat the whole system).
No disrespect, but you need to suck it up and pull your own load.
Michael: "Perhaps a system that allows you to volunteer for jury duty"
I am afraid that that would defeat the idea that a jury of your peers is made up of a cross section of your community. Since most of us given the choice would not volunteer, those who did would have to serve more often. That wouldn't last long. Even if it did, it would create a small group of jurors who decided all the cases.
I like Shannan's idea: Make it more comfortable. Or Doug's: Have jurors appear an hour before they are scheduled to serve. Or both. But I think the very basis of the legal system is that we all share being jurors. Meanwhile, everyone should quit bitching about how it is everyone else's problem because it is too inconvenient for you.
i think michael's idea is good. a volunteer jury like our volunteer military. only people who want to be jurors have to. if enough don't volunteer then we could pay them more to get more to volunteer. at least minimum wage.
Karen:
You do realize that our volunteer Army is a chosen profession while jury duty is no more than a once a year responsibility. It is apples and oranges. And as already pointed out, it runs counter to the principle upon which our legal system was built, that citizens share equally in the civic duty to serve. Spread across the citizenry, the burden is lessened for the few because it is shared by the many.
It seems to me that we need a serious attitude adjustment.
I have read the recent posts on your site and the others and have one question:
What exactly IS the Patriot's Journey?
~Pat
The system isn't broken, but it could use some embellishments. Most of the griping I hear is due to it being uncomfortable and boring just sitting around waiting. Most of us are willing, if not overjoyed, to serve when asked. And most agree that true hardship cases (emphasis on true) should be excused during the hardship. ("Times are tough" is not a hardship). So we might all suggest to our jury commissioners that 1) we create a waiting lounge for jurors with comfortable seating, WiFi internet access, a TV and a coffee/espresso machine like you see at car dealerships, and 2) schedule jurors to report an hour or so before their case is scheduled (they could call first for a recorded message in case their case is canceled and they need not report) rather than sit around all day for cases that aren't scheduled until the afternoon. I bet most of us would be ok with that kind of jury system.
Pat5634:
Drumwaster can probably give you a better explanation but I'll take a swing.
As I understand it, the idea is for bloggers so inclined to post something positive each day (if possible) about America beginning Memorial Day and ending Independence Day each year. There's no "requirement"; bloggers simply volunteer and try their best.
I believe Drum started it, I signed on last year and will try again this year. In this day and age, it's refreshing to read something positive about out country, don't you agree?
If you go to my "archives" link (near the top, right hand column under "Navigation") and click on "archives", then click on "Patriot's Journey", you'll be routed to a list of all my PJ posts for this year and last.
Doug
Thank you. A very nice site.
You may find this bit of trivia interesting: The first person tried by an all female jury was Judith Catchpole in 1656 for witchcraft and murder. The jury acquitted her of all charges.
Doug