We Have a New Leader!!

A new leader for what? A new leader for the list of the stupidest people I've ever met.

Late in the summer I received a summons for jury duty. Awesome! Problem was that it happened to be the same week I had already committed to attend a wedding. I wrote a letter asking for a postponement and it was granted. Well, it started today.

After arriving and checking-in, I was herded into a small room about 20'x20' with about 100 other potential jurors. The coffee was stale and the whole room reeked of assorted perfumes and colognes. Finally, we were addressed and we watched an exciting video about the judicial process. I can't believe people don't already know these things. I mean, have you never watched Law and Order? But it did introduce the entire court staff and judges so that was neat (snore).

So then we're instructed to wait around indefinitely. I wish I had been prepared for this part. Don't worry, I learn quickly. Apparently, everyone else got some secret directions to bring books, computers, etc. I didn't get that memo. Thanks a lot! But there was some free reading available if I wanted to choose between Redbook, Better Homes and Gardens, newspaper from last Thursday or free government agency brochures. I chose the latter. But hey, now I know that our fire, police, and water departments are the recipients of various unmemorable awards I had never heard of! And I also found out that old people smell weird! And never under any circumstances should you put seafood into a microwave in a small room with limited ventilation!

After about an hour of that excitement, they pulled us together. They read the names of about 15 people to head off into a courtroom. I wasn't one of them. Boo!! So we dispersed again. This time I went to sit in the hallway. No sooner did I sit down before we were herded once again for another call. This time, they did call my name! It was about the only one they didn't mutilate when pronouncing it.

After being lined up and being told to get rid of chewing gum, we were paraded in. I got the cool end seat on the front row. And boy was the chair comfy after sitting in the stiff, why-do-they-pretend-they-padded-these seats in the first room?!

Then the judge started explaining the process to us again. No biggy! Take an oath, answer some questions. Selection would take place after the series of questioning.

But first... they had heard that some witnesses were in the lobby area of the courtroom discussing the case. Asked us if we had seen or heard them. Only one person had seen the guy she was talking about but hadn't heard anything. Judge decides to move on, but defendant interjects that he doesn't believe us. Judge says we took an oath, we have no incentive to tell an untruth, moving on. He mutters something about the jury didn't look to be his peers...something something. All I could figure by this was that we weren't black and we had teeth.

So questioning starts. The prosecutor does her job. She's nice and polite and she asks us those hard questions in a way that makes it seem like she doesn't want to ask them, but must. You could tell this was a DUI case by the line of questioning. Anybody abstain from drinking? Well, the minister does. The other 14 of us know how to party! Ever convicted of DUI? Family members? etc, etc, etc. Then it's time for the defense to question. Well, forgot one important point...

First indicator of stupid: representing self. In retrospect, I find it likely that the gentleman has experience in law (perhaps 'with the law' would be a better term) but I seriously doubt an ounce of training in the area. Perhaps the courtroom decorum was the dead giveaway. Perhaps it was the fact the he didn't look like he knew what was supposed to happen next or what his role was. Who knows, but the judge had counsel on standby for some time but he was dismissed once jury questioning began. But that is no indicator of guilt, so let's proceed.

Now it's his turn to question. Okay, ready. First you have to ask a question. That's sort of the definition of questioning. Once started, his questions were of the variety that one might expect if you were questioning a witness, not a potential juror. But he has the right to know details of events that had been disclosed during the prosecutor's questioning. So let's proceed. But now you're just beginning a lecture. That's called an opening statement. Judge stops him, tells him as much, and we find that he never had any real questions to begin with. All that's left is for each of us to state name, occupation, spouse's occupation, number of children, what area of the county we live in, and how long we've been living in the county. We're dismissed for a few minutes with the instruction of not talking about the case with anyone, even other jurors. And due to the allegation that witnesses were located in the outside area, were instructed to move further away if necessary.

Well, it was necessary. You could pick out who they were speakign of by the fact that they had on the same weird "badges" as the defendant. Some placard on a lanyard with the scales of justice and some print too small to read from a distance. I sit and the guy takes a call on his cell phone. He starts talking loudly about how jury selection has started and something about 'not his peers' before I'm far away enough to not be able to comprehend what he's saying. I look back and the bailiff is esorting him and the defendant into a conference room off to the side. It appears that jury tampering was the motive, but it seems to be unsuccessful. We're called back in, so let's proceed.

Now it's time for striking jurors. Defense goes first. I vaguely remember learning that at some point. Okay, who do you want to strike? (crickets chirping) Judge tells him he has the right to participate in the process, asks if he wants to. Nothing. Not a yes, no, nothing. Dummy indicator #12 by this point (I forgot other details like the fact that he didn't want a record/transcript, then he did, and other small details). He refuses to say anything. Judge calls him and prosecutor to the bench. Asks him what's going on. Let's him know that refusing to participate will result in a contempt of court charge. He says okay. Then the judge adresses the jury.

Basically, we're dismissed from this case. Explains the judicial process to us in front of the guy. Explains that he was found competent, he just doesn't think that the laws apply to him. Explains that this is not the first time the case has tried to go to court. (the charges were from March) And basically that he was willingly refusing to participate (which was obvious). He keeps trying to interrupt but she keeps him quiet. Then she tells him that she knows that he was just trying to get another continuance so he could go free while delaying the inevitable again. Then she has him carted off in cuffs for contempt to be held until he was willing to let the trial proceed according to the Constitution. Because we're not on the case, she explains to us that she usually doesn't talk to the jury that way, it was just a strange situation and she didn't want us to be too confused about the process.

You dumb bastard. So now, a new leader on the stupidest people I've ever met list. He's lucky I haven't met Ted Kennedy.