Jury service selectors becoming very aggressive

Forums › Off topic › Jury service selectors becoming very aggressive

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1077413 30-Jun-2014 22:13

Kyanar:
KiwiNZ:

Last time I looked outside this was not Australia.

I am not going to bother wasting my time debating the point with you if you're just going to dismiss every reasonable point that doesn't fit your world view.

It's not so much that he disagrees that's the problem. It's the continuing series of useless one-liners in response that I find grating. Sure, we don't want to copy Australia for everything and this isn't Australia but the Australian approach does suggest there's a reasonable alternative and in a thread discussing these issues, if someone isn't going to respond intelligently to alternate approaches, it's probably better that they don't spam the thread.

MadEngineer

4292 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1077484 30-Jun-2014 23:49

You can also ask the registrar prior to entering the courtroom, at which point you'd ask the judge if that failed.

I'm surprised this hasn't come up in the media where someone has lost a contract or suffered otherwise as a result of being forced to serve.

You're not on Atlantis anymore, Duncan Idaho.

MaxLV

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1077497 1-Jul-2014 00:16

eracode:
KiwiNZ: It maybe higher tech now I don't know but just a few years ago i visited the high court they had a barrel that they turned and drew the names. It really was random. It was quite cool actually.

But was that to select the jury from the pool of people who had already been summoned and who were waiting in the court? I was talking about the initial selection of names to whom summonses are sent.

They select potential jurors by random from the electoral roll. You know how the electoral roll has a number alongside your name? I guess they run a random number selector against the electoral roll, and the numbers that 'come out' are the people who get selected for jury service.

Simple as that...

MaxLV

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1077498 1-Jul-2014 00:21

afe66: (lighthearted questions)

Isnt jury duty one of those things we have to do as part of living in our society ?
Like paying tax..

A difficulty for some but an obligation we shouldn't be able to get out of otherwise juries will not reflect our society.

Perhaps the system should be improved with earlier notification.
Ie you have 3 months notice to get your affairs in order / arrange cover.

Is the problem just money or are our jobs more important ?

For those who are too busy with work commitments, how are you planning to cope with illness or an operation.
Could income insurance cover something like this ?

A.

Every jury summons I have had has *always* been received 3-4 months in advance of the actual 'appearance' date.

MaxLV

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1077500 1-Jul-2014 00:28

networkn:
sxz: The law is not an ass. If all the people with important jobs could write in and get off Jury duty, all Jury's would be comprised of retiree's, beneficiaries and stay-at-home mums and dads. That's why they are getting more and more forceful with you - they do not want to give you a get out of jury free pass, you are an important part of the cross section of society. If you were accused of something would you want a full cross section of society, including those intelligent hard workers?

Can you tell me a better way of doing it?

Referring to randomness - I don't believe it's ever quite random. For starters you need to be enrolled to vote with a current address -or you wont receive a notice. I wonder how many people have moved, missed a notice and gotten in trouble (or not)? All lawyers & judges are excused. Is anyone else? Finally, I suspect that if you are excused for a good reason, you are put in a short list for next time, so if you are excused you are more likely to be called up again to make sure you are able doing your duty.

If I am accused of a crime, I want a jury comprised of a specific type of person, not of all sorts of people :) That's why lawyers spend so much time on Jury selection :)

The prosecution and defence only get to challenge three jurors each from those being selected, and all they can do is say 'challenge' as your name is called by the clerk of the court.

Interesting though that the prosecution and defence always seem to have 'paperwork' they refer to for each person that's called. It's not just if they like the look of you or not. I hope it's just the basic 'age, address, occupation' stuff....

It's not like the US TV shows where potential jurors are 'put on trial' by the defence and prosecution....

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1077579 1-Jul-2014 08:43

dejadeadnz:
Kyanar:
KiwiNZ:

Last time I looked outside this was not Australia.

I am not going to bother wasting my time debating the point with you if you're just going to dismiss every reasonable point that doesn't fit your world view.

It's not so much that he disagrees that's the problem. It's the continuing series of useless one-liners in response that I find grating. Sure, we don't want to copy Australia for everything and this isn't Australia but the Australian approach does suggest there's a reasonable alternative and in a thread discussing these issues, if someone isn't going to respond intelligently to alternate approaches, it's probably better that they don't spam the thread.

My response was to this "Nope, not at all. If the Australian government can afford to pay average daily wage to jurors, then so can the NZ government. " which was an answer to my question "KiwiNZ: To those who have posted that you feel the payment for Jury service is too low are you willing to pay increased taxes to fund such an increase?" It was reasonable and applicable to respond that this is not Australia.

I am not opposed to increase Jury fees but these will need to be funded from somewhere either by increased taxes or funding cuts elsewhere. Kyanar appears to not want to contribute to the system at all. With that attitude the rest of NZ will have to do continue to do more for less.

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#1077594 1-Jul-2014 09:17

Until they introduce more flexibility about timing or pay for lost earnings self-employed people like me will continue to be unable to afford to appear for Jury service.

I know that you can nominate a date within a year if you wish to defer Jury service but the problem is I don't know that far ahead when I will not be working. What they really need to do is allow people to contact the court when they know they will be available for Jury duty.

I wonder how judges would feel if they were randomly selected to sit on a trial without being paid. I expect they would not be very keen but they expect everyone else to do it for nothing.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

robjg63

4098 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1077614 1-Jul-2014 09:39

Many countries have scrapped/overhauled the jury system and we should look at this as well.

Having done jury service several times (random selection - seems they pick on you forever if you turn up once I reckon!), you should be quite frightened if you get tried by a jury. NEVER underestimate the stupidity of the general public. There are the people that dont listen at all. The people who start making up their own laws. The people who say - 'I dont know - what does everyone else think?' The people who are sure the judge has been hinting and giving them subtle clues as to how they should vote. And finally the people who start judging the person on trial based on bigoted opinions (ie they wouldnt be here if the police didnt think they are guilty).

If we have to stick to a public jury why do we need 12 people? - 6 would be just as good/bad.

Some countries have a jury of judges alone. Some have several judges and several members of the public.

There are plenty of options available but doesnt seem much willingness to change the system.

Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself - A. H. Weiler

SaltyNZ

8233 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1077616 1-Jul-2014 09:46

robjg63: you should be quite frightened if you get tried by a jury. NEVER underestimate the stupidity of the general public. There are the people that dont listen at all. The people who start making up their own laws. The people who say - 'I dont know - what does everyone else think?' The people who are sure the judge has been hinting and giving them subtle clues as to how they should vote. And finally the people who start judging the person on trial based on bigoted opinions (ie they wouldnt be here if the police didnt think they are guilty).

Indeed. Given that juries are almost entirely made up of people who are either too stupid, lazy or unfortunate enough to not be able to get out of it, then no matter what the reason any particular juror is there, you're pretty much guaranteed not to get a fair result.

Stupid? You won't understand. Lazy? You won't listen. Unfortunate? You'll be worrying about all the things going wrong in your own life. Either way, you're not heavily invested in whether or not *I* am innocent. Having said that there are some really good people that give it their best. My dad was once called to a rape trial. It became pretty obvious to them all that the allegations were completely false and a clear case of changing your mind the next morning. That day they ended what must have been a nightmare for the poor guy in the dock.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1077619 1-Jul-2014 09:54

Trial by Jury is just another foundation of our democracy, that is, the citizens decide, or should decide. A Jury is supposed to be representative of society in general, I don't think numbers as low as 5 or 6 would achieve that spread. With society you have a range of personalities etc and a Jury will reflect that. There will be the Loud Bully, there will be those who do not care and those who would rather be elsewhere, there will be those with disabilities and those with varying levels of learning. There will be those who believe that their way is correct and anyone who believes differently is stupid.

It is not a perfect solution but what would be? It is flawed and that is why there are checks and balances.

robjg63

4098 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1077626 1-Jul-2014 10:08

KiwiNZ: Trial by Jury is just another foundation of our democracy, that is, the citizens decide, or should decide. A Jury is supposed to be representative of society in general, I don't think numbers as low as 5 or 6 would achieve that spread. With society you have a range of personalities etc and a Jury will reflect that. There will be the Loud Bully, there will be those who do not care and those who would rather be elsewhere, there will be those with disabilities and those with varying levels of learning. There will be those who believe that their way is correct and anyone who believes differently is stupid.

It is not a perfect solution but what would be? It is flawed and that is why there are checks and balances.

Plenty of other countries use different systems. Just because we have always done it like that (since we copied it from England) doesnt mean we should keep doing it like this. There have been problems getting enough jury candidates for the last couple of decades now.
The jury doesnt decide the sentence - perhaps they shouldnt decide the verdict either.

Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself - A. H. Weiler

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1077627 1-Jul-2014 10:12

OK, I asked my client for a letter explaining that they require me for support.

It was a bit embarrassing and I'm really annoyed I'm put into this position by some pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job.

Anyway, I'll see how that goes.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1077635 1-Jul-2014 10:19

surfisup1000: OK, I asked my client for a letter explaining that they require me for support.

It was a bit embarrassing and I'm really annoyed I'm put into this position by some pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job.

Anyway, I'll see how that goes.

Would you rather that "pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job" be unemployed?

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1077654 1-Jul-2014 10:49

KiwiNZ:
surfisup1000: OK, I asked my client for a letter explaining that they require me for support.

It was a bit embarrassing and I'm really annoyed I'm put into this position by some pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job.

Anyway, I'll see how that goes.

Would you rather that "pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job" be unemployed?

What I'd rather is that they take peoples applications seriously.

These people sit there ruining other peoples lives while in a secure 9-5 government job. They have no idea of the pressures of those with real jobs.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1077671 1-Jul-2014 10:58

surfisup1000:
KiwiNZ:
surfisup1000: OK, I asked my client for a letter explaining that they require me for support.

It was a bit embarrassing and I'm really annoyed I'm put into this position by some pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job.

Anyway, I'll see how that goes.

Would you rather that "pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job" be unemployed?

What I'd rather is that they take peoples applications seriously.

These people sit there ruining other peoples lives while in a secure 9-5 government job. They have no idea of the pressures of those with real jobs.

I worked for the Government...

1. The job is/was by no means secure.
2. It was a real job with real stress and pressures.
3. I would have loved to have only worked 40 hours per week.

The decisions they make MUST be supportable by the empowering Act of Parliament, if the reason being put forward is not supported by evidence or is not authorised under the act they cannot grant it, or would you prefer Government staff to act outside the law?

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14