Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
15161 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1956699 14-Feb-2018 01:58
Send private message

Oldmanakbar: They don't ask questions. Your name is called from the front of the room to sit in the chair, you start walking. The lawyers look at you and say "challenge" and thats it. They don't have to give a reason. It is a bit of a farce given how many challenges they get each. For my one in the end it was a four day trial, total waste of everyone's time, as the person who was the victim obviously didn't even want to be there and the defense had already worked out a bargain. But we still had to deliberate on the last charge. 12 Jurors, 8 of us followed the judges instruction. They give you a flow chart basically. We then spent 6 hours convincing the other 4 that just because "he looks like he is a bit of a dick" is not a reason to send someone to prison for 5 years. I wouldn't want to do it again. No one wanted to be there.

 

 

 

Interesting. So it sounds like that basically  judge you solely on your appearance. Even though that is always something that we are always told that we shouldn't do. My dad once got called up, he wore a suit and looked very professional, and he didn't get picked, and he probably needed to dress down. He said he wants to go on one of these big trials, but he will probably never get the opportunity. My grandma was 80+ with dementia got called up, and I don't think they allow people that old, or people can be excused over a certain age. So it  ended up being a waste of money for the tax payer even calling her up.


615 posts

Ultimate Geek


  # 1956772 14-Feb-2018 09:32
Send private message

rugrat: The form I've got says

" If you do not show up for jury service, or you refuse or neglect to serve on a jury, you may be fined up to $1000 under the Juries Act 1981, or you may be arrested and taken to court for jury service."

So they can arrest you and throw you onto the Jury, seems they don't care how deciatated someone is, just they've got them there occupying a space.

My employer is not happy, and I don't have a clue what I'm doing, just got to go with flow.

 

 

 

It's easy. Start with being asleep when they call your name for the challenge process. Then keep falling asleep.

 

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/3304887/Juror-discharged-after-falling-asleep


 
 
 
 


5385 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1957047 14-Feb-2018 13:18
One person supports this post
Send private message

So the $1,000 fine is if you fail  to attend when summoned to serve as a juror.  So it could be $1,000 each time you are summoned. The act doesn't say per day or anything like that.  So it's potentially $1,000 per summon and perhaps if the court repeatedly issues summons to you, you could be fined multiple times.

 

A fine can only be imposed after the court has told you they intend to fine you and given you a reasonable chance to explain your absence.

 

They use snail-mail so a % of summons will go missing.  Last figures I saw suggested about 1,000 items are lost every week by the snails.

 

 

 

 

 

 





Mike

98 posts

Master Geek


  # 1957050 14-Feb-2018 13:20
One person supports this post
Send private message

There is a somewhat relevant video from CGP Grey on the topic of jury nullification.

Lock him up!
10679 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  # 1957057 14-Feb-2018 13:40
Send private message

Neat video. And another excellent reason why juries shouldn't exist in the first place.

 

 





I don't think there is ever a bad time to talk about how absurd war is, how old men make decisions and young people die. - George Clooney
 


13317 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 1957060 14-Feb-2018 13:50
One person supports this post
Send private message

mattwnz:

Oldmanakbar: They don't ask questions. Your name is called from the front of the room to sit in the chair, you start walking. The lawyers look at you and say "challenge" and thats it. They don't have to give a reason. It is a bit of a farce given how many challenges they get each. For my one in the end it was a four day trial, total waste of everyone's time, as the person who was the victim obviously didn't even want to be there and the defense had already worked out a bargain. But we still had to deliberate on the last charge. 12 Jurors, 8 of us followed the judges instruction. They give you a flow chart basically. We then spent 6 hours convincing the other 4 that just because "he looks like he is a bit of a dick" is not a reason to send someone to prison for 5 years. I wouldn't want to do it again. No one wanted to be there.


 


Interesting. So it sounds like that basically  judge you solely on your appearance. Even though that is always something that we are always told that we shouldn't do. My dad once got called up, he wore a suit and looked very professional, and he didn't get picked, and he probably needed to dress down. He said he wants to go on one of these big trials, but he will probably never get the opportunity. My grandma was 80+ with dementia got called up, and I don't think they allow people that old, or people can be excused over a certain age. So it  ended up being a waste of money for the tax payer even calling her up.



I'll dust off my Saville Row suit and Fedora, take a chauffeur driven Bentley to court, walk in and say loudly in my best BBC circa 1955 accent "Can we hurry along and convict these bogan gypsy types? I have lunch at my Club at 1.”

That should do it!







21291 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 1957062 14-Feb-2018 13:54
Send private message

Geektastic:
mattwnz:

 

Oldmanakbar: They don't ask questions. Your name is called from the front of the room to sit in the chair, you start walking. The lawyers look at you and say "challenge" and thats it. They don't have to give a reason. It is a bit of a farce given how many challenges they get each. For my one in the end it was a four day trial, total waste of everyone's time, as the person who was the victim obviously didn't even want to be there and the defense had already worked out a bargain. But we still had to deliberate on the last charge. 12 Jurors, 8 of us followed the judges instruction. They give you a flow chart basically. We then spent 6 hours convincing the other 4 that just because "he looks like he is a bit of a dick" is not a reason to send someone to prison for 5 years. I wouldn't want to do it again. No one wanted to be there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting. So it sounds like that basically  judge you solely on your appearance. Even though that is always something that we are always told that we shouldn't do. My dad once got called up, he wore a suit and looked very professional, and he didn't get picked, and he probably needed to dress down. He said he wants to go on one of these big trials, but he will probably never get the opportunity. My grandma was 80+ with dementia got called up, and I don't think they allow people that old, or people can be excused over a certain age. So it  ended up being a waste of money for the tax payer even calling her up.

 



I'll dust off my Saville Row suit and Fedora, take a chauffeur driven Bentley to court, walk in and say loudly in my best BBC circa 1955 accent "Can we hurry along and convict these bogan gypsy types? I have lunch at my Club at 1.”

That should do it!

 

You will find yourself being told off by the judge, and likely held in contempt. Fines for this vary, but you'd likely be fined, and recycled back into the general pool.

 

The thing is, defense and prosecution probably want opposite things in a Juror, so if you are at the extremes you may end up being included regardless. 

 

 


 
 
 
 




21291 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 1957064 14-Feb-2018 13:58
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

Neat video. And another excellent reason why juries shouldn't exist in the first place.

 

 

 

 

Ok, well I do understand what you are saying and why, but the alternatives are having 3 suitably qualified judges presiding over each trial seems pretty challenging as well. We would have to potentially quadruple our judge count, and the chances of doing this on short order is very low, and potentially causes issues with the quality of judges. I guess having 3 would somewhat resolve any slackers etc.. 

 

 


1457 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1957084 14-Feb-2018 14:17
Send private message

networkn:

 

Rikkitic:

 

Neat video. And another excellent reason why juries shouldn't exist in the first place.

 

 

 

 

Ok, well I do understand what you are saying and why, but the alternatives are having 3 suitably qualified judges presiding over each trial seems pretty challenging as well. We would have to potentially quadruple our judge count, and the chances of doing this on short order is very low, and potentially causes issues with the quality of judges. I guess having 3 would somewhat resolve any slackers etc.. 

 

 

OTOH, trials will be shorter without the necessity of dumbing everything down so juries can follow it, and three judges deliberating will take less time than 12 laypeople. They will be able to fit more trials in a week, as the first two - three hours of every trial won't be wasted with Jury selection.

 

So, maybe only twice as many judges.


Lock him up!
10679 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  # 1957086 14-Feb-2018 14:17
Send private message

networkn:

 

Ok, well I do understand what you are saying and why, but the alternatives are having 3 suitably qualified judges presiding over each trial seems pretty challenging as well. We would have to potentially quadruple our judge count, and the chances of doing this on short order is very low, and potentially causes issues with the quality of judges. I guess having 3 would somewhat resolve any slackers etc.. 

 

 

 

 

I take your point, but we could still start moving in that direction. We already have judge-only trials. Maybe there is a reasonable way to gradually move to two-judge trials, then three. The defendant might have to agree, at least initially, and maybe additional safeguards would have to be built into the appeals process, but it shouldn't be impossible. I think three inquisitorial judges should be the goal, as this number seems to provide the best assurance of fairness and professionalism.

 

 





I don't think there is ever a bad time to talk about how absurd war is, how old men make decisions and young people die. - George Clooney
 


183 posts

Master Geek


  # 1957088 14-Feb-2018 14:20
Send private message

A colleague had a theory that the best way to avoid selection was to either dress really formally (and get immediately challenged by the defence) or super scruffy (and be challenged by the prosecution) ... 




21291 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 1957090 14-Feb-2018 14:23
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

networkn:

 

Ok, well I do understand what you are saying and why, but the alternatives are having 3 suitably qualified judges presiding over each trial seems pretty challenging as well. We would have to potentially quadruple our judge count, and the chances of doing this on short order is very low, and potentially causes issues with the quality of judges. I guess having 3 would somewhat resolve any slackers etc.. 

 

 

 

 

I take your point, but we could still start moving in that direction. We already have judge-only trials. Maybe there is a reasonable way to gradually move to two-judge trials, then three. The defendant might have to agree, at least initially, and maybe additional safeguards would have to be built into the appeals process, but it shouldn't be impossible. I think three inquisitorial judges should be the goal, as this number seems to provide the best assurance of fairness and professionalism.

 

 

 

 

I don't think 2 is an option. what if they disagree?

 

I have seen jury situations (not in NZ but unsure if they exist) where the jury has come back with a verdict and the judge has vacated it because it was clearly the wrong choice. 

 

Think situation where the guy is on camera stabbing woman and screaming "my name is Nathan and I am stabbing this woman to death and I am in sound mind and planned this carefully" coming back not guilty because they "liked his honesty".

 

 


Lock him up!
10679 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  # 1957104 14-Feb-2018 14:46
Send private message

networkn:

 

Think situation where the guy is on camera stabbing woman and screaming "my name is Nathan and I am stabbing this woman to death and I am in sound mind and planned this carefully" coming back not guilty because they "liked his honesty".

 

 

 

 

I like your sense of the ridiculous. I'm certain there must be cases not far removed from what you describe but I suppose that is the price of a justice system that errs on the side of caution. Hasn't there been something in the past where someone got off because of his twin brother? Or is that just a TV plot?

 

No system can ever be perfect. I would imagine that two judges would take their duty seriously and would rarely disagree. But if they did that might be cause for acquittal. And then there is always the appeals process. I don't see a huge problem here.

 

 





I don't think there is ever a bad time to talk about how absurd war is, how old men make decisions and young people die. - George Clooney
 


152 posts

Master Geek


  # 1958112 14-Feb-2018 15:49
3 people support this post
Send private message

kiwi_64:

 

A colleague had a theory that the best way to avoid selection was to either dress really formally (and get immediately challenged by the defence) or super scruffy (and be challenged by the prosecution) ... 

 

 

The best way to avoid selection is to not show up at all.

 

If you show up you still have to be there for a couple of hours each day for a week.

 

Tens of thousands skip Jury Duty each year. What's one more?


5385 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1958117 14-Feb-2018 16:04
2 people support this post
Send private message

Why don't they simply select jurors from among the willing. 

 

Put another way why would you want unwilling jurors?





Mike

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter and LinkedIn »



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Microsoft New Zealand Partner Awards results
Posted 18-Oct-2019 10:18


Logitech introduces new Made for Google keyboard and mouse devices
Posted 16-Oct-2019 13:36


MATTR launches to accelerate decentralised identity
Posted 16-Oct-2019 10:28


Vodafone X-Squad powers up for customers
Posted 16-Oct-2019 08:15


D Link ANZ launches EXO Smart Mesh Wi Fi Routers with McAfee protection
Posted 15-Oct-2019 11:31


Major Japanese retailer partners with smart New Zealand technology IMAGR
Posted 14-Oct-2019 10:29


Ola pioneers one-time passcode feature to fight rideshare fraud
Posted 14-Oct-2019 10:24


Spark Sport new home of NZC matches from 2020
Posted 10-Oct-2019 09:59


Meet Nola, Noel Leeming's new digital employee
Posted 4-Oct-2019 08:07


Registrations for Sprout Accelerator open for 2020 season
Posted 4-Oct-2019 08:02


Teletrac Navman welcomes AI tech leader Jens Meggers as new President
Posted 4-Oct-2019 07:41


Vodafone makes voice of 4G (VoLTE) official
Posted 4-Oct-2019 07:36


2degrees Reaches Milestone of 100,000 Broadband Customers
Posted 1-Oct-2019 09:17


Nokia 1 Plus available in New Zealand from 2nd October
Posted 30-Sep-2019 17:46


Ola integrates Apple Pay as payment method in New Zealand
Posted 25-Sep-2019 09:51



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.