With fake ID's, there's no way Jack would/could be called for any kind of jury servitude.

However, if somehow, he did get onto a jury, I'm sure he would hold to the original purpose of the jury, which is to judge not only the facts of the case, and the moral intent of the accused, but to also judge the justice of the law itself, and to hold the accused NOT GUILTY if he believes the law itself to be unjust.

Ken V.

I just thought it would be fun to see the inner termoil of Jack being close to the very things he hates. It would make a good read------Mark

Well, interesting thread. I've never served on a jury, don't plan to either. I was a police officer so I have been passed over for a very long time.

If I were to ever get called to serve on one, during the interview process, everyone will be guilty and subject to some sort of unusual punishment such as a vicious beating with a summer sausage-wielding senior citizen, a brutal licking from a catfish, maybe hung by the calves until extremely uncomfortable.

I know I'm being ludicrous, but with all of the rights the criminals have, it's probably best to pretend to be insane to keep from helping one of thosepukebuckets to go scott free. I blame political correctness, the Clintonesque "It takes a village" manure, and the whole soft and fluffy mentality the general public has anymore.

Just my opinion.

Well, interesting thread. I've never served on a jury, don't plan to either. I was a police officer so I have been passed over for a very long time.

If I were to ever get called to serve on one, during the interview process, everyone will be guilty and subject to some sort of unusual punishment such as a vicious beating with a summer sausage-wielding senior citizen, a brutal licking from a catfish, maybe hung by the calves until extremely uncomfortable.

I know I'm being ludicrous, but with all of the rights the criminals have, it's probably best to pretend to be insane to keep from helping one of thosepukebuckets to go scott free. I blame political correctness, the Clintonesque "It takes a village" manure, and the whole soft and fluffy mentality the general public has anymore.

Just my opinion.

You forgot to mention all that B.S. about "innocent until prooven guilty", and all that "beyond a shadow of a doubt" crap that puts the burden of proof on the prosecutors to ensure an innocent is not jailed unjustly. Screw the republic, I want a democracy.

Oh no, I didn't forget. That's all part and parcel to the ludicrous, asinine, and pointless system we live under now. It's a shame that something that was the brainchild of some noble, questionable, and idealistic people has degraded to our current society.

To be frank and without exaggerating I hate being among people, I only go out when I absolutely have to. Sounds stupid saying in a message board where people frequent and post. I don't know, it may seem rude but I just hate being around people any more. Probably for the best since most of time someone has done something monumentally stupid and guys like me have to come and straightent things out or de-escalate them before a bad situation explodes.

Oh well.

Oh no, I didn't forget. That's all part and parcel to the ludicrous, asinine, and pointless system we live under now. It's a shame that something that was the brainchild of some noble, questionable, and idealistic people has degraded to our current society.

And you'll thank your lucky stars it's there if you ever need it. From that point of view you'll notice the pukebuckets are usualy the ones that want their jobs made easier, not harder.

To be frank and without exaggerating I hate being among people, I only go out when I absolutely have to. Sounds stupid saying in a message board where people frequent and post. I don't know, it may seem rude but I just hate being around people any more. Probably for the best since most of time someone has done something monumentally stupid and guys like me have to come and straightent things out or de-escalate them before a bad situation explodes.

Oh well.

I don't see that as rude, but if it happened to me all the time I would find differant places to go. And if it happened everywhere I went, I'd have to wonder if it's me.

BTW Welcome to the board!!!

What if instead of being called to jury duty, there's an innocent man on trial. The only witness who could testify and clear him is Jack. That would be a fix for him, clear an innocent man, find the guilty party and make them pay, all the while staying under the radar so he doesn't have to testify.

And to stay on topic. Over the last 2 weeks I ended up serving on Jury duty myself. The trial I was on seemed clear cut to me yet I had to argue w/ my fellow jury for a not guilty. It was a bar fight. The defendant was charged w/ 2 counts of assault in the 2nd degree. He had left the premises (kicked out actually) and came back for his truck a while later. When he got to his truck one of the patrons who had a problem w/ him earlier charged him. He backed up away from his truck so it wouldn't get damaged. Backed up at least 20 feet before he stood his ground. He ended up hitting the guy before he was hit himself. Then another guy who ran towards him and got hit as well.

It was a clear case of self defense. Yet after the trial was over we found out that the prosecutor was asking for 3 years. He'd only accept a plea bargain for 12 months + a day so it'd still be a felony. In his closing the prosecutor tried to slip in criminal trespass for going back to get his truck from a place he was kicked out of. The parking lot wasn't part of or owned by the bar he was in. Under the self defense law if the person is legally in a place they are entitled to be. etc. It was just sickening to see a prosecutor sink so low. Yeah Tacoma!

Anyway when it was all over we got to ask questions from the attorneys. There's a reason its called the legal system now not the justice system. This 25 year old kid has had to fight this for 15 months. His name is now cleared but he had to spend at least 15 grand to do so. Under WA state law we the jury were given the option of reimbursing him for his expenses but I couldn't get a majority vote of 10 to go for it. One guy kept going on and on how he's a tax payer and how he hates to have his money reward other peoples stupidity. I countered w/ the fact that I'm also a tax payer and I was more pissed off that the prosecutor's office brought this to trial because that was the real waste of money and our time.

Sad thing is I never served before. I was looking forward to doing my civic duty. But then I got to see the system try to ruin someones life. It didn't make me feel very "civic" but I was glad to be the voice of reason serving on a jury. Sorry for the long rambling post. I easily could have added more just because I was and still am angry over the situation. I waited almost a week before writing about it. I did find it interesting but now I'm glad that it's over.

The jury system needs level headed people to work properly. The basic human need to cause others grief is so much out there. Its the old my life sucks so yours should too. Or somehow I forgot how it was when I was young thing. I'm glad you kept a level head and tried to do the right thing.------Mark

Yeah, I gotta agree with the previous poster.

Give yourself a hearty pat on the back.

I wish there were more folks like you out here to help the rest of the world some common sense, and make it easier on the ones that are out there by keeping old, snarly pessimists in line.

Good for you Jeff! The voice of reason is a tough part to play some times, but your post shows that you did very well indeed!