eracode:

DjShadow:

eracode: I would love to know exactly how they select jury candidates. I am 62 and have been summoned once - in 1974. Some much younger people I worked with were summoned several times over the last 5 - 10 years.

Electoral Roll is where they draw names from, they have summoned me 4 times so far I think incl once when I was in the stand-down period from last time I served.

I know the names come from the Electoral Roll but what I don't understand is how some people never get called (or once in 40 years in my case) and others get called almost every year. Doesn't quite sound like the Laws of Probability are in play here.

surfisup1000:

Sideface:

eracode:

scuwp: Or simply don't turn up. Most don't and rarely does anything come of it.

Sounds like good advice to me under the circs. Seems OP has no real alternative - a wee bit of civil disobedience.

"A wee bit of civil disobedience" can be expensive: "If the registrar hasn’t excused you from jury service and you don’t attend, you can be fined up to $1000."
see: http://www.justice.govt.nz/services/access-to-justice/jury-service-1/just-been-summoned/if-you-cant-attend

$1000 is pocket change compared to what I'd lose. My contract could be cancelled due to the fact they need 100% reliability. They are a foreign client so don't care about NZ jury system. 

JimmyH: One of the things that really irritates me is the Judges and Lawyers who so sanctimoniously intone about how vital jury service is to the justice system, and there should be heavy penalties for those who don't do their duty. Of course, they themselves don't. Judges and Lawyers holding a current practising certificate are exempt from jury service.

Perhaps if they practised what they preached I would be a little less grumpy about having my day and contracting relationship with my employer randomly disrupted, while the people who impose the burden are happily at no risk whatsoever of being inconvenienced by having to actually serve themselves.

MaxLV:

JimmyH: One of the things that really irritates me is the Judges and Lawyers who so sanctimoniously intone about how vital jury service is to the justice system, and there should be heavy penalties for those who don't do their duty. Of course, they themselves don't. Judges and Lawyers holding a current practising certificate are exempt from jury service.

Perhaps if they practised what they preached I would be a little less grumpy about having my day and contracting relationship with my employer randomly disrupted, while the people who impose the burden are happily at no risk whatsoever of being inconvenienced by having to actually serve themselves.

They're barred from serving due to the *obvious* conflict of interest.

BruceHamilton:

MaxLV:

BruceHamilton: I strongly recommend that the original poster does not wait until the scheduled date, but initiates their oral or written appeal process to the Judge well before the scheduled appearance date. I'd be interested in any evidence that waiting until the scheduled date is a good idea, or even effective, as I suspect it would greatly annoy the legal profession. Advance exemption allows them to provide alternative jurors.

A judge/magistrate isn't the one who decides who will be called or excused from jury service. That's decided by MoJ staff based on the persons reasons why they shouldn't be selected once they've received the Jury service letter.

The judge/magistrate can exempt someone from serving on a jury, who is sitting in a courtroom waiting to see if they're selected for a jury. But you better have a really good reason why you cant be on that particular jury. 

I must have misunderstood, as the first post in this thread clearly indicated the original poster has already been declined by the MoJ staff, in which case the OP can now appeal that MoJ decision orally or in writing to the Judge before having to turn up for jury selection.

itxtme:

MaxLV:

JimmyH: One of the things that really irritates me is the Judges and Lawyers who so sanctimoniously intone about how vital jury service is to the justice system, and there should be heavy penalties for those who don't do their duty. Of course, they themselves don't. Judges and Lawyers holding a current practising certificate are exempt from jury service.

Perhaps if they practised what they preached I would be a little less grumpy about having my day and contracting relationship with my employer randomly disrupted, while the people who impose the burden are happily at no risk whatsoever of being inconvenienced by having to actually serve themselves.

They're barred from serving due to the *obvious* conflict of interest.

It concerns me you would think that an individual lawyer or judge is incapable of being impartial.  I would tend to say they are barred due to their *percieved* conflict of interest.

MaxLV:

BruceHamilton:

MaxLV:

BruceHamilton: I strongly recommend that the original poster does not wait until the scheduled date, but initiates their oral or written appeal process to the Judge well before the scheduled appearance date. I'd be interested in any evidence that waiting until the scheduled date is a good idea, or even effective, as I suspect it would greatly annoy the legal profession. Advance exemption allows them to provide alternative jurors.

A judge/magistrate isn't the one who decides who will be called or excused from jury service. That's decided by MoJ staff based on the persons reasons why they shouldn't be selected once they've received the Jury service letter.

The judge/magistrate can exempt someone from serving on a jury, who is sitting in a courtroom waiting to see if they're selected for a jury. But you better have a really good reason why you cant be on that particular jury. 

I must have misunderstood, as the first post in this thread clearly indicated the original poster has already been declined by the MoJ staff, in which case the OP can now appeal that MoJ decision orally or in writing to the Judge before having to turn up for jury selection.

If you're declined an exemption by the MoJ staff you can ask the judge/magistrate to exempt you, but I'm pretty sure you have to have a'legal' reason, such as knowing the person/persons on trial or other persons related to the case. It's for a specific case/jury not simply for being called for jury service. I'm pretty sure 'work commitments' wont count most of the time to a judge/magistrate. 

Bung: How can you appeal to the Judge in advance? Unless it's a small court you don't have a specific courtroom until the first round of balloting. I recall that prior to final selection on some cases there was an outline and jurors that didn't think they could cope were given a chance to be excused that trial

profrink: A while back, I was summoned each year for 4 years straight. My requests for exemption were declined multiple times even though I had provided very valid evidence such as international flights and country visa confirmations/paper work. It was as though they hadn't even read my responses and just declined. Each time it ended up taking an angry phone call for MoJ to open their eyes.

Though the worst experience I had was in my final year of University. I was summoned during exam period - particularly on the day of my first exam. My exemptions incl. evidence, were rejected twice and after calling I was repeatedly told I'd have to appear otherwise face a fine blah blah. I was more than happy to serve my duty at an alternative date, but no. 

Well, there was no way in hell I was missing an exam due to a flawed system, so I thought f*** it have fun with the media s*** storm if you try to fine me. Didn't hear anything.

My experience has given me the impression that if you are excused, your chance of summons is much greater. Also I think they become more skeptical the more you ask to be excused, no matter how unfortunate the timing is. But really, having provided consulting for MoJ - it's most likely down to terrible business systems & processes.