Dennis Hackethal
@dennis-hackethal·Member since June 2024
Activity
If jury participation were voluntary, “it would just be the same batch of NCIS fans deciding every case.” (Source)
#3323·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoPeople are ordered to appear for jury duty simply because, if it were a toothless request instead, hardly anyone would show up.
Nonsense. If you persuade people, make it worth their while, they will show up in droves.
People are ordered to appear for jury duty simply because, if it were a toothless request instead, hardly anyone would show up.
#3319·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoBut then some people might not be able to afford a jury trial.
There are loans, charity, insurance, etc.
#3319·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoBut then some people might not be able to afford a jury trial.
By the same logic, we should force people to produce food for free, because there might be some people who can’t afford it and would starve.
Ironically, countries that nationalized food production have historically starved millions to death, while countries where food production is purely voluntary and only done in exchange for payment feed their populations best. In the latter countries, food is good, abundant, and cheap.
#3319·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoBut then some people might not be able to afford a jury trial.
Yes. Juries don’t grow on trees. If you want a service, you have to pay for it.
#3318·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoPeople say the same thing when it comes to police services and the fire department. The solution to the free-rider problem is to not provide the service to people who don’t pay.
But then some people might not be able to afford a jury trial.
#3317·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days ago[I]f you’re on trial, you can force the state to use a jury to decide the facts of the case.
So it’s a trade off - if you have the right to a jury trial, so also do you have the obligation to serve on a jury for a person who has chosen a jury trial.
Otherwise, you get what’s called a “free rider problem”, people who refuse to serve on juries still insisting on a jury trial if they’re on trial.
People say the same thing when it comes to police services and the fire department. The solution to the free-rider problem is to not provide the service to people who don’t pay.
[I]f you’re on trial, you can force the state to use a jury to decide the facts of the case.
So it’s a trade off - if you have the right to a jury trial, so also do you have the obligation to serve on a jury for a person who has chosen a jury trial.
Otherwise, you get what’s called a “free rider problem”, people who refuse to serve on juries still insisting on a jury trial if they’re on trial.
No, you want unbiased people. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t care.
#3310·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoForce means you get people who don’t care about justice. For example (emphasis added):
Another issue that makes me a bad juror is I simply don't care. Unless someone does something to me or someone I care about, I don't care. If someone had done something to me or mine then I couldn't be a juror for that trial anyway. If John Smith steals Jane Doe's car, I don't care. Even if John Smith kills Jane Doe's [sic], I don't care. I think killing someone is wrong but if it doesn't effect [sic] me personally I don't care what punishment they get. If that makes me a bad person, so be it.
You want people who don’t care. You need neutrality.
#3311·Dennis HackethalOP revised 11 days agoForce means you get a bunch of people on a jury who don’t want to be there. This either introduces friction because they will drag their feet, or they will just vote for whatever outcome will get them out of there the fastest, which isn’t necessarily justice. For example (emphasis added):
[A] guy said to use the opportunity to fight back against laws you don't agree with. I thought about doing that even though we were asked if we could put personal feelings aside and enforce the law and I didn't want to be the one to say I couldn't so I stayed quiet. Then I thought, “What if I'm the only juror who thinks the law is unjust”? “Do I really want to drag this out just to fight the system”? I decided to make my decision based solely on whatever would get this over with the quickest. In this particular case a guy was charged with crimes that I don't think should be crimes anyway. Since I know the majority of people in my community feel the opposite, I chose to keep my opinion to myself for fear of ridicule of people knowing my feelings.
… I'm supposed to report for jury duty tomorrow. I hope it gets cancelled or I'm not chosen but if not, I'll [do] whatever I have to to get out of there the fastest.
You want people who don’t care. You need neutrality.
Force means you get a bunch of people on a jury who don’t want to be there. This either introduces friction because they will drag their feet, or they will just vote for whatever outcome will get them out of there the fastest, which isn’t necessarily justice. For example (emphasis added):
[A] guy said to use the opportunity to fight back against laws you don't agree with. I thought about doing that even though we were asked if we could put personal feelings aside and enforce the law and I didn't want to be the one to say I couldn't so I stayed quiet. Then I thought, “What if I'm the only juror who thinks the law is unjust”? “Do I really want to drag this out just to fight the system”? I decided to make my decision based solely on whatever would get this over with the quickest. In this particular case a guy was charged with crimes that I don't think should be crimes anyway. Since I know the majority of people in my community feel the opposite, I chose to keep my opinion to myself for fear of ridicule of people knowing my feelings.
Force means you get a bunch of people on a jury who don’t want to be there. This either introduces friction because they will drag their feet, or they will just vote for whatever outcome will get them out of there the fastest, which isn’t necessarily justice. For example (emphasis added):
[A] guy said to use the opportunity to fight back against laws you don't agree with. I thought about doing that even though we were asked if we could put personal feelings aside and enforce the law and I didn't want to be the one to say I couldn't so I stayed quiet. Then I thought, “What if I'm the only juror who thinks the law is unjust”? “Do I really want to drag this out just to fight the system”? I decided to make my decision based solely on whatever would get this over with the quickest. In this particular case a guy was charged with crimes that I don't think should be crimes anyway. Since I know the majority of people in my community feel the opposite, I chose to keep my opinion to myself for fear of ridicule of people knowing my feelings.
… I'm supposed to report for jury duty tomorrow. I hope it gets cancelled or I'm not chosen but if not, I'll [do] whatever I have to to get out of there the fastest.
Force means you get people who don’t care about justice. For example (emphasis added):
Another issue that makes me a bad juror is I simply don't care. Unless someone does something to me or someone I care about, I don't care. If someone had done something to me or mine then I couldn't be a juror for that trial anyway. If John Smith steals Jane Doe's car, I don't care. Even if John Smith kills Jane Doe's [sic], I don't care. I think killing someone is wrong but if it doesn't effect [sic] me personally I don't care what punishment they get. If that makes me a bad person, so be it.
Force means you get a bunch of people on a jury who don’t want to be there. This introduces friction because they will drag their feet.
Force means you get a bunch of people on a jury who don’t want to be there. This either introduces friction because they will drag their feet, or they will just vote for whatever outcome will get them out of there the fastest, which isn’t necessarily justice. For example (emphasis added):
[A] guy said to use the opportunity to fight back against laws you don't agree with. I thought about doing that even though we were asked if we could put personal feelings aside and enforce the law and I didn't want to be the one to say I couldn't so I stayed quiet. Then I thought, “What if I'm the only juror who thinks the law is unjust”? “Do I really want to drag this out just to fight the system”? I decided to make my decision based solely on whatever would get this over with the quickest. In this particular case a guy was charged with crimes that I don't think should be crimes anyway. Since I know the majority of people in my community feel the opposite, I chose to keep my opinion to myself for fear of ridicule of people knowing my feelings.
Force means you get a bunch of people on a jury who don’t want to be there. This introduces friction because they will drag their feet.
#3305·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days ago“The random selection helps keep all citizens equal.” (Source)
I understand that you don’t want to introduce bias, but it just doesn’t follow that jurors have to be selected by force. You can make it voluntary without introducing bias.
“The random selection helps keep all citizens equal.” (Source)
#3303·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days ago“If we make it a profession, we'll still have elites judging commoners and commoners unable to get justice.” (Source)
Why would it automatically be an elite profession? Just adjust your selection process accordingly.
“If we make it a profession, we'll still have elites judging commoners and commoners unable to get justice.” (Source)
#3301·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days ago“If we only take volunteers, we'll be perpetually lacking jurors or we'll have jurors that don't represent the general populace.” (Source)
No, again (#3300), if you make it worth their while, plenty of people will show up voluntarily.
“If we only take volunteers, we'll be perpetually lacking jurors or we'll have jurors that don't represent the general populace.” (Source)
#3299·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoWe need jury duty because without it, “we can't guarantee the accused their right to trial by a jury of their peers if we don't have peers available to serve on juries.”
If you make it worth their while, you will have plenty of people signing up voluntarily.
We need jury duty because without it, “we can't guarantee the accused their right to trial by a jury of their peers if we don't have peers available to serve on juries.”