More acquittals in BLM standoff

[busykngt]

benenglish, I understood the point you're making and that is certainly a way to handle the situation. But most likely, wouldn't be "my" way. My own personal way, would first be "avoidance" altogether.

 

[jrbfishn]

Ben, you never cease to amaze.

from an idjit coffeeholic

 

[benenglish]

My own personal way, would first be "avoidance" altogether.

That's a common attitude and completely understandable.

I find it a bit funny, though, the way things work out. I'd actually like to serve on a jury. It'll never happen though. I've been called a dozen times (at least) but never selected. My background has too many things that cause one side or the other to use a strike.

What I find crazy is that I can usually make a good guess as to who struck me and why based on the questioning during voir dire. However, they pretty much always make a mistake and are striking a person who would have been open to hearing their side of the case.

 

[benenglish]

Ben, you never cease to amaze.

I am genuinely curious why you say that and I hope you'll tell me.

So people who don't know me don't think I'm fishing for compliments, feel free to send it privately. For the people that do know me, this should just be further confirmation that my worldview is sufficiently cattywampus that I have no clue what prompted his post. This is just further proof that "Ben's weird" is both true and something I realize...but I'm always trying to understand it better.

 

[busykngt]

I have not served on a civilian jury ever (been called many times). You can only be called once every 24 months and then you're automatically given a by. I actually jot down the last date I was called, in my checkbook. I've used that before, to get out of jury duty.

However, under UCMJ, I have both served on a courts marshal trial in an awol case and ran an Article 15 case concerning destruction of government property (an MP car & on-Post housing unit). In the awol case, as one of six panel members (jury), I voted to find the solider guilty. In the MP car crash, I was the sole investigator, judge and jury; due to extenuating circumstances, I let the solider off. In the written trial transcript, I did rip his company commander a new AH for the role he played in the whole sorted affair.

I have absolutely no desire to play any role in passing judgement on another human being if there's any way to avoid it in the future. (Cast the first stone and all that rot...). I'm sure there are others eminently more qualified to do so, than myself, and I'm quite willing to let them.

--
ETA: Please no lectures on "civic duty" unless you were likewise under threat of being drafted (student deferments, having been done away with, at the time that effected me). I did my civic duty already - and it wasn't exactly as a "volunteer".

 

[Hoji]

I don't really have to worry - I'd never be selected to actually serve on a jury.
My preacher imparted the knowledge of a 'sure fire' way to always get "excused" from jury duty. Since you're allowed to bring a book to read during waiting time to be interviewed for jury selection. Just make sure it's The Holy Bible (the larger, the better) and black with LARGE bright gold print, announcing itself as being The Holy Bible (so it can be seen from across the room). If the prosecutor elects to not immediately "dismiss you for cause" and decides to ask you a question concerning guilt and/or punishment, then just speak softly uttering something about "forgiveness" and turning the other cheek. And Presto! Just like magic, you're sent home for the day (assuming ya don't stop by the strip club on your way home!).

Why would you attempt to dodge your responsibility as a citizen? You have more power in the jury box than you do in the voter booth.

This is why too often juries are made up of people not smart enough to get out of jury duty and not actually a jury of one's peers.

 

[Dawico]

I am genuinely curious why you say that and I hope you'll tell me.

So people who don't know me don't think I'm fishing for compliments, feel free to send it privately. For the people that do know me, this should just be further confirmation that my worldview is sufficiently cattywampus that I have no clue what prompted his post. This is just further proof that "Ben's weird" is both true and something I realize...but I'm always trying to understand it better.

I will give my thoughts as I agree with JRB (and many other members).

Many people have a broad range of knowledge in many different areas, as you do. But your vast knowledge range also comes with extended pinpoint intricacies into the subjects of which you speak accompanied by the ability to explain it so a common reader can understand it.

Your vast experience is also mind boggling.

Those of us that know you know you are not looking for any compliments. We look forward to your posts.

 

[Army 1911]

In a civil trial one time, the judge asked me if I could decide on the preponderance of evidence. I told him that I would not lower my standards for anybody. Oddly, I was sent home.

 

[benenglish]

Thanks for the kind words. I kinda needed that today.

...the ability to explain it so a common reader can understand it....

There's a quote most often attributed to Albert Einstein. It goes "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." I try to keep that in mind. The most common result of keeping that in mind is not that I post good explanations; it's the fact that I don't comment far more than I do. Despite how wordy I am, I consciously try to keep my (metaphorical) mouth shut as much as possible.

Your vast experience is also mind boggling.

My experience is a mile wide and an inch deep.

Seriously, though, if you don't know what I did for a living before I retired, ask me when you see me. (I don't document it online.) In person, I don't mind admitting it and when you hear it, I guarantee a light bulb will go off in your head and you'll think "Gee, now it all makes sense."

 

[jrbfishn]

I am genuinely curious why you say that and I hope you'll tell me.

So people who don't know me don't think I'm fishing for compliments, feel free to send it privately. For the people that do know me, this should just be further confirmation that my worldview is sufficiently cattywampus that I have no clue what prompted his post. This is just further proof that "Ben's weird" is both true and something I realize...but I'm always trying to understand it better.

At lunch when I have more time. It is nothing but complimentary.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

 

[jrbfishn]

Ben, if your world view is cattywampus, more politicians need to borrow it.
I know enough on a lot of subjects to be dangerous. You continually show me that I don't know enough. I freaquently tell younger people that they can't learn too much. To always learn as much as they can about as many things as they can. No matter how trivial it may seem. You never know when you may need that knowledge. You are one of the few people I ever met that has gone to the trouble to do exactly that. The depth of your knowledge never ceases to amaze me. What you don't know, you say so. And from what I have seen, you then research it to find out. Rest assured, when you speak, my dumass listens. And trys to keep up.

A qoute from a Louis L'Amour book. Be an asker of questions. A seeker of answers. And when you find an answer, question that as well.
Seems to pretty much sum you up.

By the way, my best to Sister. Hope she is doing good and hope to see BOTH of you in Oct.. If not, you are going to force me to take time off so I can come down there and we can go to dinner or something.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

 

[jrbfishn]

I will give my thoughts as I agree with JRB (and many other members).

Many people have a broad range of knowledge in many different areas, as you do. But your vast knowledge range also comes with extended pinpoint intricacies into the subjects of which you speak accompanied by the ability to explain it so a common reader can understand it.

Your vast experience is also mind boggling.

Those of us that know you know you are not looking for any compliments. We look forward to your posts.

Put far better than I could.
Your presence has been sorely missed.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

 

[easy rider]

You can only be called once every 24 months and then you're automatically given a by.

Don't count on that, depends on what court it is, I can tell you that County can call you up after 6 months, or at least that was what the judge said the one time I went here in Texas.

 

[busykngt]

Don't count on that, depends on what court it is, I can tell you that County can call you up after 6 months, or at least that was what the judge said the one time I went here in Texas.

Exemptions are listed here. I see the 24 month exemption applies only with counties over 200K population. I'm sure there are other rules that may apply for federal jury selection. The one and only time I tried to use it (or even could use it), it worked for me.

Appears to be a Texas state-wide law which would seem to indicate, would be less dependent on which lower courts are involved. Not sure what a 'petit juror' means in legal terms - perhaps that means you had to actually have been selected as a juror (as opposed to just having received a summons? IDK).

http://www.txcourts.gov/about-texas-courts/juror-information/jury-service-in-texas/

 

[TxStetson]

Don't count on that, depends on what court it is, I can tell you that County can call you up after 6 months, or at least that was what the judge said the one time I went here in Texas.

The Ector county clerk explained to me last month, during my 5th time in 3 years, that you can't receive a summons until 6 months has elapsed from your previous summons.

 

[busykngt]

For Ector County, that would fall in alignment with the state law since it's population doesn't exceed 200K.

According to that link, it looks like you can receive a permanent exemption once you hit 70 years old.

 

[TxStetson]

For Ector County, that would fall in alignment with the state law since it's population doesn't exceed 200K.

According to that link, it looks like you can receive a permanent exemption once you hit 70 years old.

Damn, that means I can expect to be called 40 more times.

 

[easy rider]

Damn, that means I can expect to be called 40 more times.

Half that.