Twelve Angry More or Less Sanguine Men Persons of Various Genders

Well now, that was interesting.

I have spent this past week and a half serving as, of all things, a juror on an assault case -- there was a firearm involved, or so we concluded beyond a reasonable doubt -- in the downtown Los Angeles criminal courthouse.  (Guess who got to be foreperson....)  I have always appreciated jurors; now I can finally say that I have personally Felt Their Pain.  [I have been called to serve before, but we lawyers are usually among the first to be tossed out when our brethren and sistren start wielding their peremptory challenges.]  I am left without doubt on this point as well: those who actually serve, and actually do the hard work of jurying, deserve no end of praise and appreciation (this writer excepted, of course, since claiming praise for oneself is gauche at best).

I will be acting as Chief Seminar Wrangler for an all-day insurance-related event tomorrow, then return to the practice of law for my own clients and to the spreading of foolishness for you, O reader. 

Comments

[Cowtown Pattie]

Only served once as a jurist, on a shoplifting charge against a mother and daughter tag team in Wally World.

I am almost of the opinion that there could exist reasonable doubt in a HUGE amount of cases. The panel I served on had extremely varying senses of what constituted "reasonable".

And, it is further my opinion that jurists are not constitutional purists and often go with their gut reflex rather than the facts.

But, that would be my reasonable experience...