View Full Version : Oh joy, I won the lottery
streetglideok
10-25-2013, 20:43
Well it appears my betting on a good run of bad luck paid off. Received my jury summons(my first one) a few weeks ago for next week. Called the number, and of course, I am to report in, ugh. Oh what joy. It is our civic duty, etc but still, ugh.
If you have strongly defined values, they let you go home about lunch time. [Coffee]
streetglideok
10-25-2013, 20:50
It'll be a short day for me then. Molester=rope and tree. Thug that kills pregnant women=chain behind truck then rope in tree
SideShow Bob
10-25-2013, 21:09
Just wear a "Free Colorado" Tee shirt and you'll be out in time to get an egg Mc muffin before Mc D's stops serving breakfast......
streetglideok
10-25-2013, 21:10
Already being told to wear an NRA or S&W shirt,lol
Or man up and do your civic duty. You might even enjoy yourself.
Zundfolge
10-25-2013, 21:22
Its sad that a sacred duty that truly separates us from the hoards of serfs and subjects around the rest of this God-forsaken dirt ball is seen as such a burden.
I've been called half a dozen times over the years and only served once ... chances are even if you don't "dress to get rejected" you'll end up going home by lunch and even if you have to serve it'll likely only be a day or two.
Just look at is as an opportunity to get to see the inner workings of our legal system without it costing you any money or your freedom (and who knows, you might get a real interesting case ... in which case you're basically getting what amounts to free interactive dinner theater).
you never know, you might end up on a gun rights issue and you could be the only voice of reason within the group.
Maybe you'll get the chance to put a dirt bag in jail.
Someone with whom I work, just told me that his offspring just got the call on the James Holmes case.
BushMasterBoy
10-25-2013, 21:39
Maybe a large marijuana leaf print on a shirt will do...http://mitchhowardblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/j-2-marijuana-shirt.jpg
Zundfolge
10-25-2013, 21:47
Just keep in mind that if you look like you're really trying to get tossed out of jury duty with cute t-shirts and a "hang'em high" attitude, you might just piss off the judge and get slapped with a contempt charge.
Also, you never know ... you're tactic might just make you look EXTREMELY attractive to either the prosecutor or the defense attorney and they'll fight hard to keep you during voir dire ... they usually only get to toss out a couple potential jurors for no cause, otherwise they have to give a reason why you're being asked to leave (and if the reason is that they believe you will be prejudiced against their position the opposing counsel might just see that as a reason to keep you).
On the jury I served on one of the questions we were asked during voir dire is if we trusted police officers. I said "not really" (which is the truth ... and which is something that many people would say flippantly to try to get off a jury) and that is probably what guaranteed I got seated on that jury (the case involved an overzealous sheriff's deputy that arrested the defendant because the defendant didn't follow his direct order however we determined that he didn't give the defendant enough time to comply and basically gave the order and tackled him at the same time).
streetglideok
10-25-2013, 21:58
I'm not going to try and get tossed. I'm just going to let the cards lay how they lay. If I have to serve, so be it, it is my civic duty. I've heard some say it was really neat, and others compared it to the joys of an IRS audit when the debate began in deliberations. The part of not knowing what to expect bothers me more than anything, and getting stuck on some OJ trial. On the flip side, I could end up with a long drawn out trial, go broke living off the meager pay they give you, and write a book later on about it all.
blacklabel
10-25-2013, 22:04
The only time that I've gotten into the hard selection process was for a rape/witness victimization case that i would have loved to have been on the jury for.
Zundfolge
10-25-2013, 22:04
Honestly, if you end up actually serving on a Jury you'll probably be glad you did when all is said and done ... and then you're put on a list where you can't be called again for at least a year.
Actually last time I got called we all sat in the big jury waiting room for a couple hours and ALL the cases for that day were either settled or dismissed before they needed a jury so we ALL went home (you get free coffee and you get to watch a movie while you wait ... I also think they have free wifi, but I don't remember for sure).
I didn't get free coffee or free wifi. :(
Aloha_Shooter
10-25-2013, 22:18
Personally, I would love to serve on a jury but doubt I'll get to with my background as an engineer/physicist and analyst not to mention being retired military. For some reason, I'm led to believe neither the prosecutors nor the defense attorneys much like having a leader trained to think thoroughly and logically.
gnihcraes
10-25-2013, 22:30
I didn't get free coffee or free wifi. :(
Free wi-fi at my location.
Or man up and do your civic duty. You might even enjoy yourself.
Yep, amazing the attitude of some folks there for jury, if I ever need a jury, I hope to get a positive crowd to believe in the system. And yes, don't piss off the clerks or judges. I'm not sure contempt would be issued, but you might get a talking to, and held all day just because.
You can get parking paid for sometimes, discounts on lunch at places around the courthouses, and bus fare if you rode it in. Sometimes .51 a mile for the drive in. Just depends on the situation.
Also a day or two paid away from "Work" if you're not self employed.
OtterbatHellcat
10-25-2013, 22:46
What if I've already done my "civic duty" ? What if I drove to work and used my turn signals, and paid my tags and insurance is up to date? How about if I've paid my taxes, and I'm not on the dole? Lets say I didn't kill anybody since I've been alive. Long list could be here.
Waste one day, five days, five months serving jury duty. I have enough stuff to worry about every day, without dealing with that horseshit.
12 Angry Men.....original, not the crap remake... Awesome movie, made me want to be part of the process. *in that era*....not in todays world.
imo.
BushMasterBoy
10-26-2013, 00:22
Just make sure you don't breastfeed....
http://www.tennessean.com/viewart/D0/20131023/NEWS03/310230039/Breastfeeding-Missouri-juror-cited-contempt
In my legal opinion this judge is an ahole!
Katastrophic
10-26-2013, 00:32
I, personally, would embrace the opportunity to serve on a jury. It would be hard for my family, as I'm a stay at home mom and I homeschool our children. As long as I wasn't put on a 6-8 month trial, I think that being a part of the system that decides the fate of our misguided, would be enlightening. I would look at it as an opportunity to learn, then move on.
jerrymrc
10-26-2013, 06:03
Personally, I would love to serve on a jury but doubt I'll get to with my background as an engineer/physicist and analyst not to mention being retired military. For some reason, I'm led to believe neither the prosecutors nor the defense attorneys much like having a leader trained to think thoroughly and logically.
You would be surprised. There were 3-4 ex military among my group of 12.
losttrail
10-26-2013, 07:14
I've only been summoned 1 time since living in El Paso county in 13 years.
Served on 3 jury panels in 15 years when we lived in Texas. While something of an inconvenience, in the end it felt good doing my duty.
Or man up and do your civic duty. You might even enjoy yourself.
Its sad that a sacred duty that truly separates us from the hoards of serfs and subjects around the rest of this God-forsaken dirt ball is seen as such a burden.
I've been called half a dozen times over the years and only served once ... chances are even if you don't "dress to get rejected" you'll end up going home by lunch and even if you have to serve it'll likely only be a day or two.
Just look at is as an opportunity to get to see the inner workings of our legal system without it costing you any money or your freedom (and who knows, you might get a real interesting case ... in which case you're basically getting what amounts to free interactive dinner theater).
It's pretty fun
Just be honest, streetglide. Odds are, if you're conservative and lean more towards law and order, you'll get dismissed by the defense. I know I'll never serve on a jury- LE usually doesn't bode well for being "impartial" in the defense's eyes.
funkymonkey1111
10-26-2013, 09:42
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MFebZlUJ7E
funkymonkey1111
10-26-2013, 09:43
Just be honest, streetglide. Odds are, if you're conservative and lean more towards law and order, you'll get dismissed by the defense. I know I'll never serve on a jury- LE usually doesn't bode well for being "impartial" in the defense's eyes.
Not all cases are criminal, you know.
Just be glad you're not in the James Holmes jury pool
Not all cases are criminal, you know.
Just be glad you're not in the James Holmes jury pool
Of course- but defense attorneys don't like law and order leaning folks even for civil cases, they tend to mess up that whole preponderance of the evidence thing. Plus a friend of mine was called for jury duty and it was a DUI case- the first question got him dismissed, "How do you feel about drunk drivers?" He said "If they kill someone it should be no less than 2nd degree murder."
hghclsswhitetrsh
10-26-2013, 10:01
If people have such an issue with jury duty we could always have a computerized system that take the info that determine guilt or not. Look at how well it works for college football.
[Sarcasm2]
[goFyourself][goFyourself] --> Alabama.
Last time I got called up, I was the first alternate and was in the group going through voir dire. It was a drunk driving case. The first juror was excused and I was asked to move over to the jury panel. No sooner did my butt hit the seat and I was excused by the defense. That's the closest I've ever been to being in a jury.
I don't believe that our system of laws is a million shades of grey, so I'll likely never be on a jury. I would like to be, but I don't ever see it happening. You have to respect the pattern.
Zundfolge
10-26-2013, 10:13
Personally, I would love to serve on a jury but doubt I'll get to with my background as an engineer/physicist and analyst not to mention being retired military. For some reason, I'm led to believe neither the prosecutors nor the defense attorneys much like having a leader trained to think thoroughly and logically.
It really depends on the case, each case is different and competent attorneys will take the facts of the case and their strategies into account when choosing who they'll keep on a jury and who they'll dismiss. The truth is that many cases are won and lost during vior dire.
And this idea that being a conservative or opinionated, or intelligent or even having law enforcement or legal experience will automatically get you disqualified is bunk ... different attorneys want different things from different juries and the MAIN reason people that get called don't make it onto juries is that most of the time they call a LOT more people than they need.
Jury duty is like the golden rule.
Sure, it's disruptive to our cozy routine, but I am going to do the best job possible, because god forbid I ever face a jury trial and it's full of the schleps who couldn't get out of jury duty.
Maybe you'll get the chance to put a dirt bag in jail.
Or a chance to set an innocent man free!
streetglideok
10-26-2013, 10:55
We don't have the Holmes case but we have that kid that killed the GI and his pregnant wife coming up, as well as a few others I believe.
I'm also analytical by nature. If I have to serve, its going to be interesting come deliberation time.
Circuits
10-26-2013, 10:57
I've been called a number of times over the years. Empaneled twice, served through one trial once, back in June of this year. My work pays me for jury duty, so it was no hardship, and did end up being pretty interesting.
No jury of my peers would ever convict me.. The problem is finding an actual jury of my peers.
spqrzilla
10-26-2013, 11:08
I would not recommend the offensive t-shirt routine. Never know when a judge might decide that contempt of court would be a fun hearing ...
Wear a suit. Guaranteed to get you dinged off the panel.
Never even gotten a letter about it in my 57 years. I can be pretty open-minded, but also pretty close-minded and opinionated. Like the James Holmes thing. It's an undisputed fact what he did, IMO the fucker deserves NOTHING but a bullet. I'd probably be quite rude to his "defense attorneys", I have zero respect for anyone who would stand up for a murdering lunatic.
There's right, and there's wrong. I have no respect for anyone who does wrong in the name of "duty" or "orders", whether it's a defense attorney trying to protect a confessed murdering turd, or a LEO that participates in gross abuses of power and oppression against innocent, undeserving citizens in the name of "following orders" or "enforcing the law". Such as the case of that guy in DC who had a dud shotgun shell and some empty brass and what happened to him, his family and home.
Just pretty hard for me to keep my emotions out of things like that. Guilty is guilty, and I wouldn't want to be part of a slug getting off with a wrist slap. I'm all about rights and due process and all that, but the rights of crime victims means a lot to me too.
jerrymrc
10-26-2013, 16:04
Or a chance to set an innocent man free!
We did. Was accused of molesting a minor by a person of trust. After the 4 day trial we found out a number of things that would have made it a slam-dunk not guilty but some prosecutors just want a plea-bargain because they have nothing.
Bottom line was the little 10yo got caught doing something she should not have and made up a very big lie to get out of it costing a man $30K to defend. Of course it helped my fellow jurors that I live in the same hood and live in the exact floorplan/house as the accused. [Flower]
The last time I got called for jury duty I was dismissed rather promptly. I guess when they find out your wife works for the district attorney's office in the discovery department handling all of the evidence files it kind of turns them off to you.
wctriumph
10-26-2013, 17:33
Jury duty is no big deal, go, do your civic duty with pride. Bring a lunch and something to read like American Handgunner!
streetglideok
10-29-2013, 07:03
I just keep winning and winning. I'm going to Cripple Creek when Im done, apparently my numbers just keep coming up!
RblDiver
10-29-2013, 09:40
I would love to serve on a jury. I was called when I was 19, but I was away in college at the time. Haven't been called since.
Granted, as others have said, I doubt they'd want me. I can be impartial, but I also hate scumbags. Also, I know about and believe in jury nullification >.>
KevDen2005
10-29-2013, 11:11
Get called to Jury duty and before hearing any arguments you yell, "Guilty...what's for lunch."
Zundfolge
10-29-2013, 11:19
I just keep winning and winning. I'm going to Cripple Creek when Im done, apparently my numbers just keep coming up!
So I'm assuming this means you got placed on a jury? After the case is over you'll have to tell us all about it.
Get called to Jury duty and before hearing any arguments you yell, "Guilty...what's for lunch."
http://shop.goodiemags.com/media/celebs/GoToJail.gif
streetglideok
10-29-2013, 17:37
Yeah obviously I can't discuss it right now, but when its all done I'll be sure to brief everyone. I'll just say right now, don't be expecting anything this week... or next week... or....
Inconel710
10-29-2013, 17:55
Joy of joys. I've been called twice. Once during the week of college graduation week. Honestly wanted to serve but admitted I would be distracted and was let go. Second time was last year and they dismissed most of the cases that day.
My wife got called earlier this year and had to sit a case that turned out to be a little interesting. The DA and the public defender were both young lawyers and the judge used it as a teaching experience for both of them.
gnihcraes
10-29-2013, 20:28
Guy came into the jury counter yesterday, all Pissed Off, got a parking ticket on his car while waiting to be called for jury duty.
He parked in a paid lot and where it said "Event Parking" thinking Jury duty was an Event? ??wtf. We asked if he paid for his parking, he said no. So if you don't pay, you get a ticket, event or not.
Then he says "I'm a 5-10 felon anyway and will never send a person to Jail or Prison while on a Jury" and stomps off... lol what a hoot sometimes. Judge will love this guy.
Poor Clerks dealing with this stuff day after day.
Then he says "I'm a 5-10 felon anyway and will never send a person to Jail or Prison while on a Jury" and stomps off... lol what a hoot sometimes. Judge will love this guy.
Poor Clerks dealing with this stuff day after day.
One of the guys got off my jury for saying something similar. He was all tatted up and basically said that he had spent time in jail and he doesn't trust cops, judges, or attorneys. They let him out.
Zundfolge
10-29-2013, 21:08
Doesn't a felony conviction disqualify one from jury duty along with voting and gun ownership?
Doesn't a felony conviction disqualify one from jury duty along with voting and gun ownership?
I was interested in this as well. Most states restore voting rights after release. http://www.rockthevote.com/election-center/voting-ex-felon/
I believe if you can vote, you can serve on a jury. So I would think that jury is fair game for felons. However, I'd imagine they wouldn't be viewed as impartial very often.
gnihcraes
10-29-2013, 21:24
They can vote under certain circumstances.
By Colorado Revised Statues, Title 13, Article 71 Colorado Uniform Jury Selection and Service Act, §13-71-105 (3), you are eligible to be a trial juror, but you are not eligible to be a grand juror. However, a felony conviction may be a factor the parties consider in determining whether to keep a person on the jury.
http://www.courts.state.co.us/Jury/FAQs.cfm
streetglideok
10-29-2013, 22:17
Anyone with a criminal history like that will get booted ASAP, as soon as the DA smells it. THey seem to have a radar for them.
KevDen2005
10-29-2013, 22:27
Doesn't a felony conviction disqualify one from jury duty along with voting and gun ownership?
Voting rights on felony convictions are up to each state. Many states allow felons to vote once they have served their time. I believe a couple states still allow convicts to vote.
I think if you have a driver's license and were registered to vote via the motor-voter legislation, you can get a jury summons. My late wife got a jury summons about 6 months after she had passed away. I called the clerk's office to let them know that she probably wasn't going to be there.
Zundfolge
10-30-2013, 08:26
Based on this (http://www.courts.state.co.us/Jury/FAQs.cfm)it looks like if you're registered to vote or have a driver's license or state ID card or pay any taxes to the state your name is on the potential jury list.
How was I chosen for Jury Service?
Each year, the Judicial Branch receives lists of all registered voters and all holders of driver’s licenses and non-driver identification cards throughout the state, as well as records from the Colorado Department of Revenue. The lists are merged, duplicates and names of deceased citizens are removed, and the resulting list is divided by county location. Throughout the year, each county requests a certain number of names, based on the number of trials scheduled, which are randomly selected from the list.
RblDiver
10-30-2013, 09:20
I called the clerk's office to let them know that she probably wasn't going to be there.
I'm a bit disappointed you didn't tell them she'd be a little late!
(That's what I want at my funeral: Have the start time at, say, 7:00, but don't wheel in the casket for ~5min or so, then have someone apologize for me being late to my funeral!)
Got jury notification in the mail yesterday as well.
streetglideok
10-30-2013, 17:37
I think its an NSA conspiracy!
jerrymrc
10-30-2013, 18:07
In my case I had received 7-8 notices over the years and never had to report. When I got the last one I had tickets in hand to fly home because my mom was in the Hospital. I thought naw, what's the chance? I had to go in and out of a room of 200 or so was the first name called. [Bang]
I do not remember who but another member of the board along with a co-worker were all called to that case. The other member was dismissed after disagreeing with me on what "common sense" meant. [handbags]
It was worthwhile for me. [Flower]
I seem to get called almost every year. I enjoy the quiet time, reading a book after they show the movie explaining the importance of jury duty. Once in a while I will actually get to go up to a courtroom, where I am dismissed within the first ten minutes.
In other states I've lived in, they would just have me call in and confirm my employment or show up and provide my ID, after which I could leave. Apparently the Chief Judge in Adams County doesn't grant blanket exemptions even though no oxygen consuming defense attorney would let me sit on fare jumping case.
Enjoy the trial. Real litigators are not like TV lawyers, and non-newsworthy cases (99.98%) usually don't take more than three days.
newracer
10-30-2013, 18:47
I have only been summoned once in 25 years. The guy plead to a deal right before we were going to go into the court room to start the selection. I'd actually like to do it.
My wife was on a murder trial a few years ago, see said it was very interesting. Took about two weeks, he employer (a law firm) paid her full salary for the entire time.
streetglideok
10-30-2013, 21:57
I think I need to go gambling, I seem to be really beating the odds.
streetglideok
11-14-2013, 20:55
Well, I just wanted to update everyone as promised about my trial. We rendered our verdict tonight, and if anyone was following the local news websites, may have seen it.
http://www.kktv.com/home/headlines/Man-Found-Guilty-After-Quadruple-Shooting-231996361.html
It was 3 long weeks of trial, that I learned a lot from. It's been a very long and emotional day for everyone involved, so I'll save any of my commentary about the trial for tomorrow or this weekend. What the news media reports, what you see on CSI, etc, is nothing to what really happens in such cases. There were self defense elements, that weighed heavily on us, and me, as well as many other things.
So are you glad you were able to participate?
EDIT: Read the article you posted. Was he offing gang bangers?
streetglideok
11-14-2013, 21:11
In the trial, it came out that he was allegedly involved with the west side crips. I say that, because no two witnesses gave the same story. The guys were all hanging out, when one of the shooting victims arrived, and when the defendant or his friend flirted with the victim's girl, it spark an argument, that led to a west side-east side thing. They were told to leave the apartment, and fight it out outside, and that's when it went downhill. One guy sucker punched the defendant's friend, and Paige pumped 2 9mm zombie rounds into him, then accurately picking off three more people, then coming back to the first guy and pumping the rest of his mag into him as he lay on the ground before leaving. Self defense was brought up, as he was in fear of his life as they put it. Lot of things had to be weighed in on this, and we ultimately determined it was excessive force for the situation. I also got to see first hand what critical defense/zombie bullets will do, and not thru ballistic gelatin. I saw the real stuff. No armchair quarterback stuff, but the autopsy pics, etc.
Thank you for sharing. I have a ton of questions, but I will let you decompress.
streetglideok
11-14-2013, 21:35
Thank you for sharing. I have a ton of questions, but I will let you decompress.
Thank you. There is a lot to learn from this.its been long and drawn out. Im glad I did my duty, but is a heavy burden.
Thank you for serving your community. I am certain the Judge and attorney all thanked you, however, what you and your fellow jurors did is one of the greatest services any responsible citizen can perform.
God bless you.
DSB OUTDOORS
11-14-2013, 21:55
I won too. $4 whole dollars last night. Yes, you heard right. I won the Power Ball. I bought a Beer to cry in!! [LOL]
anaphylaxis
11-14-2013, 22:24
Thank you for serving your community. I am certain the Judge and attorney all thanked you, however, what you and your fellow jurors did is one of the greatest services any responsible citizen can perform.
God bless you.
+1
It a heavy responsibility to sort out the details and decide which set of facts are correct.
Just wear this when you go in..
http://ep.yimg.com/ay/yhst-134504073046332/quot-free-colorado-quot-t-shirt-4.gif
oops.. read through the rest of the thread.. well anyway.. in the future, wear this..
streetglideok
11-15-2013, 21:43
I could have easily taken the path of making lame excuses why I could not serve. Financially I had a good reason to be disqualified, however I felt compelled to let the cards fall however they fall. The media, typical for them, did not give a good portrayal of what happened. First off, we are bound strictly by what evidence is provided in the case, and can not rely on outside information. I know this is a no brainer, but it really changes the dynamics of how you think at home about a trial in the news, and when you're in the jury box. In all honesty, my thoughts swayed back and forth as each witness came forth. I had not made a solid decision yesterday at lunch time when we were ushered into the jury room. To complicate things, about every witness(outside of LEO) had a conflicting story. Some of which I blame on tunnel vision, just due to the events that unfolded in front of them. Most of them had been drinking to some degree, and that played a part as well. Some placed the shooter in weird places that made no sense, while others said this victim or that victim was standing in different locations. Most of the guys denied gang involvement, or that the victims were involved in gangs. The girls denied there were drugs. The girls were young, the youngest being 14 at the time of the shooting. There was the story of the jailhouse snitch, that said two witnesses that were in jail with him said guns were stashed in a caprice behind the apartments. We had the CSI people come in, talking about gun shot residue, and when they will and wont process GSR tests. They went over the bullets and casings, and what kind of gun was likely used. We had not one, not two, but three shrinks come in and go over the mental state of Paige. The eye doctor that said his eye sight was horrible, 20/400 without corrective lenses, the DNA expert from CBI, etc. We had the autopsy photos, very graphic and the ME giving a very descriptive statement about what the bullets did. The victim's mothers were on the stand at one point.
What it came down to was this. Was enough evidence present to make it possible for other weapons to have been on scene and were smuggled out before the cops got there? Was he in fear for his life, and was it reasonable force for self defense? Was this feud a revenge over a fight with a twin brother of a victim a few days before? Could he have done all of the shooting with intent, without glasses(he could see about 2-3ft away without lenses, after that it would be blurry) and drive the getaway car to flee the scene? Could he accurately put 9 of 10 9mm bullets into people, killing 2 people with such poor eye sight? How credible was all the witnesses?
We know drugs were present due to toxicology tests on the two murder victims, cocaine and weed, as well as significant alcohol levels. The coke was out of their systems, they likely used it earlier in the night. The jail bird snitch, claimed to have heard two people talking at the pull up bar at JDC earlier this year, however one of them turns out was having problems with his wrist and had to have surgery done, so he wasn't working out at the time of the alleged conversation. The vehicle the weapons were supposedly put into, was not at the scene. Plenty of pics were taken, and with my eye for cars, I went thru them closely and found nothing. We had 10 pieces of 9mm brass on the ground, most of which were close together. We had blood on the road with positive DNA results too. The things that were consistent were: someone flirted with someone, and it started a feud. The feud escalated into a shoving match, and the tenants of the apartment told the partys to leave and take it outside. Paige was said to have been trying to defuse the situation at that time. They went down stairs, and near the getaway car, Demo-the friend of Paige, was sucker punched.
What we pieced together from there is, Paige pulled a gun, shot the guy who punched Demo two times(M.Bean), once in the front angling away and once in the back. He moved to the next person which we got conflicting stories. I believe Jareem(survived) was shot next, two times as well, once in the leg and once in the arm. From there, the brothers Adam and Andrew were shot once each. Adam, a sickly man with sickle cell anemia and survivor of several strokes before this, was hit in the left side, striking his spine and leaving him crippled. Andrew was hit once as well, thru his left arm, into the left side of his chest, striking his heart and aorta. From there Paige turned to his left again, and stood close to M.Bean, and shot down at him as he laid on the ground, 3x I believe. M.Bean was dead as well as Andrew, due to both sustaining shots directly to the heart. Andrew was around two car lengths from Paige when we believe he was hit. This was at 4:20 in the morning, with street lights. Paige and Demo jumped into their car and fled, Paige driving. A witness threw a rock thru the back window, which was found in the car later when the car was recovered. The brass was found all together or in close proximity to where M.Bean was found. Andrew's blood was found on the road behind his car, and he was found laying beside his car, drivers door open. There was one bullet that struck the back of that car as well. Ballistics showed that they were Hornady Zombie loads(same as critical defense with the pretty green tip), fired from a gun with polygonal rifling, and the primer had a rectangular firing pin imprint. Paige did something with the gun, but it was never recovered. It would be safe to speculate he used a Glock with a 10 round mag based on evidence. The Hornady bullets went thru multiple layers of clothing, and aside from the bullets that struck bone, expanded perfectly, and did a lot of damage. The ones that hit bone had jacket separation, and deformation but still did damage. There was no problem with expansion due to clothing being in layers.
We hashed it out, and decided self defense was not plausible. One juror was hung up on this, and we, well two of us talked it over with this juror for some time before we had an agreement. The last thing I wanted to do, was send a man to jail if this was really self defense. Finally, I had to break it down and analyze it like this. M.Bean could have been seen as a threat, however Paige's life was not in immediate danger and he had proven before that he was good with his hands. He was next to his car, and didn't try to leave. He fired two shots at Bean, more or less kill shots by themselves at close range. Could be argued as self defense but questionable. He then shot and hit another man two times at probably 15-20 feet away. This guy was hit in the leg and arm, and no blood trail to show he moved after he was hit. We could not see how Jareem was an immediate threat. Adam was hit on his left side about 2 car lengths away from Paige. That would put Adam as walking or running at an angle away from Paige. He was frail, and suffered strokes in the past. Again, no way he could be a threat. Andrew, judging by his blood on the ground by where Adam was, was doing the same thing, his left side towards Paige, in a general direction of away from the shooting. Again, no immediate threat. From my counting, only one shot missed, the rest connected. Paige then went back to Bean, and delivered the remaining rounds into Bean as he laid on the ground. Ballistics showed an angled path of entry for these shots. Bean laying on the ground, he is no longer a threat, and in reality, dead already. Only then does Paige flee the scene. After arguing, we decided the force used was unwarranted and excessive. In three of the cases, there was no threat at all. In Bean's case, the excessive number of shots to him, including many with the victim laying on the ground, did not seem consistant with a self defense situation. With the distances involved, not so great lighting, we felt that he had shown pretty good marksmanship, and seemed to go with deliberate aiming, not randomly jerking rounds off, panicking, etc. He had to have had contacts in, to be able to tell the girls from the guys, and not shooting two guys other men, nor any girls. He drove away and never hit anything. If there had been guns there, someone would have shot back. Even one of the victims said he would have, had he had a gun. The car that supposedly had the guns stashed in it, was no where to be found. Police showed up fast, as at least one of the deceased still had a quivering heart beat. All witnesses were present.
Based on all of that, we felt that it was not self defense, and met the standards for murder, and attempted murder, among the other charges. Some of the jurors were gung ho and quick to want a verdict, but were not ready to face the court room when the judge read off the verdicts. It was hard to keep composer in all honesty, hearing Paige's mom and family and friends break down as the guilty verdicts were read. Even he finally showed signs of breaking down. He will get life with no parole. Knowing that ahead of time, the other jurors were stunned at the possibility. Some really are disconnected with reality(they also were liberal lol). Some on here may come up with a different idea of what really happened, some may agree with me though. Either way, being human, I couldn't help but feel for Paige's family as well as the victims' families after it was all over last night. Sure, these people were not outstanding citizens, but they are citizens no less and have rights. No one came out as a winner in this. Everyone lost something. Some jurors sadly had issues understanding that the 3weeks of their life spent on this trial is insignificant to what this means to one man's who life time. The whole thing haunted me, I think, due to the fact a greedy DA could turn a defensive shooting by one of us into something like this. It could be one of us one day at that table. Maybe I'm weak, but the things I saw will stay present in my mind for years to come. The reactions I heard will haunt me for a long time.
So much easier to comment about a news story or rant on the Internet.
Real life with real consequences. You examined the evidence and rendered a verdict you believe in. You have integrity. You will get no judgment or second guessing from me.
Be safe.
Thank you for doing your civic duty.
[snip]
The whole thing haunted me, I think, due to the fact a greedy DA could turn a defensive shooting by one of us into something like this. It could be one of us one day at that table. Maybe I'm weak, but the things I saw will stay present in my mind for years to come. The reactions I heard will haunt me for a long time.
Completely understand. But it sounds like the circumstances here were quite a bit different from a self-defense shoot. There has to be integrity in "the system" (or what's left of it) and it seems to me you just helped maintain that integrity.
ChadAmberg
11-16-2013, 09:33
Your testimony of what happened kind of makes me want to have professional jurors. Maybe non-voting ones, but subject matter experts that can answer juror questions maybe. Isn't there a type of law where the jurors can ask questions in court? Not napoleonic code, not what we have, but a third system.
streetglideok
11-16-2013, 10:06
We can ask questions in court. After a witness has been examined, cross examined, redirected, and recrossed, the judge asks the jury if they have any questions. At that time you write them down, the clerk takes it to the judge and counsel approaches the bench to review. If the question is appropriate, then it is asked, if not, then they will simply say that question can not be asked. One thing I wish could happen, is the jury asks for the recall of witnesses. During the course of the trial, a witness will be asked a slew of questions, and then you move on to the next. Well, with a trial this long and the large number of witnesses called(I haven't counted on my notes yet), you run into a situation where another witness brings to light new information that may relate to another previous witness. The lawyers can recall witnesses, but they don't always recall the ones you like. Before trial, the prosecution, then the defense reviews the question sheets you filled out earlier that day. They go thru and ask you questions, then bounce your response off other prospective jurors to test their response. I would guess that they do consider the matter in the trial in who they pick. We had 2 nurses on the jury, and 3 people who hunted. We also had a school teacher as well. It helped as we had medical insight, personality insight from the teacher(Paige's mental state, ADHD, school records etc came up) and 2 of us were well versed on firearms. I don't know if that pans out every time, but in this situation we were able to use our own life experience into play(which is allowed). Some women on the jury thought that the pistol was fully automatic, maybe he fired off more bullets than he intended, etc. There were those who had hobbies, or trade skills that were able to be applied to making a decision, and there were some who relied on us to provide our own insight, so they could make a decision. With that, I didn't only discuss things that would make it appear not self defense, I brought up things that would also make it appear as self defense. The last couple of jurors were liberals, guns were bad, and he was guilty. One was also pissy and threw a tantrum because he wanted to go back to work Friday. He wasn't overly concerned about the consequences of what we decide. The other person behaving along side him, was unemployed and had applied for a job with him earlier that week. So much for the liberal political correctness and concern for everyone's feelings. From that, I lost respect for those two people. If it would have affected the outcome of the trial I would have made it an issue to the court, and perhaps I should have anyways. If you are put on a jury for a trial, do not succumb to the selfishness of others, and if it takes days to make a decision, that is what you do.
Your testimony of what happened kind of makes me want to have professional jurors. Maybe non-voting ones, but subject matter experts that can answer juror questions maybe. Isn't there a type of law where the jurors can ask questions in court? Not napoleonic code, not what we have, but a third system.
Most of what you are describing is the job of the trial judge.
In Colorado, jurors have the opportunity to submit questions to witnesses. The questions are written and must be seen by both the prosecutor and defense attorney and approved by the judge prior to the judge asking the witness the question.
I oppose the concept of paid jurors. Most trials do not last very long and the time off without the influence from whoever is paying you is a minimal sacrifice to be expected of citizens. Sitting in judgment over the freedom of another human being is a great responsibility. I wouldn't want anyone to get too comfortable with that power.
I received a notice last week for potential duty on 2 Dec. My juror number is 476, so I have no idea if my number is low enough to even be required to report to the courthouse. I think it would be interesting to be selected to see what really happens during a trial.
streetglideok
11-16-2013, 12:19
I received a notice last week for potential duty on 2 Dec. My juror number is 476, so I have no idea if my number is low enough to even be required to report to the courthouse. I think it would be interesting to be selected to see what really happens during a trial.
Since you're local, let me give you some insight, as you will be at the same courthouse, etc. I've been told that Monday summons give you a higher risk of a trial, instead of a 1 day event. That's what happened to me. Your actual number is irrelevant in your odds of being assigned to a trial or case. You'll call the night before per instructions, and find out if you are on call, or will have to report. They typically call in about 600 people on Mondays. My number was 33XX, and they called from 31XX to 37XX on my first day. If your number is one that is required to show up in the morning, the free jury lot fills up by 8am. I usually got there 7:45 or a little after, and there were 4-5 spots left. You enter the building from the east entrance only. Typical airline security measures apply. After that, you report to W113, which is the hall to the right of where you came in. You check in and they give you a form to fill out with questions on it. There will be a list of names on the wall in front of you, those are judges who need jurors. You watch a video, listen to a magistrate talk, then they will announce a judges name, and call numbers. They are not in sequential order, they are more or less random. I think its about 60 people at a crack, and they take you to a court room and it goes from there. They may call your number and assign you to a judge but tell you to stay until instructed(my situation). As the morning goes on, judges names will be erased as plea deals are struck, etc. Odds are against you getting past this point really. If you get upstairs to a court room, out of 60 people, they will knock that down to 14 for a felony trial, or less, depending on what it is. Somehow, I defied the odds in my situation. Bring a bottle of water to drink. There is wifi in the juror room W113. If you get there too late, you'll have to park in paid parking, and that's $2 unless you are on a trial, then its free. Any questions, let me know.
HoneyBadger
11-16-2013, 13:33
Thanks for the detailed breakdown of events and thank you for being an upstanding citizen with integrity.
My only question: what caliber were the rounds fired?
streetglideok
11-16-2013, 13:39
9mm luger/9x19 or whatever you wish to call them,lol. Head stamp on the Hornady Brass said 9mm Luger if I recall, and projectiles were consistant with being the Hornady Zombie loads. Not being a real 9mm fan, as well as another guy on the jury, we were impressed by their performance. The only reason it was not four fatalities was the survivors received medical intervention fast. One survivor would have likely bled to death with the hit to his leg. The other had a spinal hit, on the 12th vertebrae, leaving him paralyzed. If he had received another hit to the chest cavity, the odds would have been higher of it being fatal.
streetglideok: You had a pretty negative attitude about this when you first posted. I'm glad that you followed through and acted as an upstanding citizen. I hope you aren't scared by this trial. The trial you were on was more heavy than my trial. After all is said and done, do you regret the opportunity to be on the jury?
streetglideok
11-16-2013, 22:46
streetglideok: You had a pretty negative attitude about this when you first posted. I'm glad that you followed through and acted as an upstanding citizen. I hope you aren't scared by this trial. The trial you were on was more heavy than my trial. After all is said and done, do you regret the opportunity to be on the jury?
Me negative? Naaw,lol. I had heard lots of stories about being on jury duty. How much of a pain it is, inconvenience, and how selfish the jurors can get. I definitely could not bring myself to lying to get out of it, though. I let whatever happen, happen. If I was meant to be on a jury, then I would be.
From all of it, I wish my first jury service would have been something much milder, instead of a trial by fire. I saw things that one should really not see, though LEO, first responders, and our soldiers get to see all to much. One of the worst days, during the second week, was when the ME came in to testify with pictures. We just came back from lunch, and I hadn't felt good from the night before. Needless to say, it didn't settle well listening to graphic testimony and seeing related pictures. I hung in there but I wasn't looking pretty(though I never do look pretty). The length of the trial was a bummer, as my employer didn't commit to helping pay me while I served. Some employers will pay full wages while you are gone, to support you doing your public duty. I think the management instead did work while I was gone, and put it in my name, giving me some pay at least. The $50 a day you get just doesn't cut it,lol. For a few days, it really isn't an issue for a lot of people, but 3 weeks really intruded on life. I can't complain about it though, as there was a lot of evidence and testimony to cover, and every American is entitled to a fair trial, even this guy. If it was my butt on the line, I would want every resource used to get me out of jail. There was also the selfish jurors, strictly concerned with getting back to their lives the next day. People like that are sickening in all honesty. Karma is a real mother, and they should hope the roles are not reversed some day. I learned a lot from this all. I came away with a greater understanding of how our system works, hands on. I learned a lot more about human nature in multiple aspects. I learned a lot more about myself, and I feel I grew from this experience. I gained a greater understanding of the pain a trial can create, to victims, their families, as well as the defendant and their families. I have no regrets on serving as a juror in this case. It was inspiring in some ways. I rather not have to serve in this capacity again, at least not for a while(bank account isn't pretty right now). If in a year when I am available to be summoned again, and I get picked, I'll gladly do my duty again. It may be an inconvenience, but it is a responsibility of every American. It is what seperates our country from everyone elses, and for it to work, it requires a sacrifice from us. Freedom is not free, and it takes our servicemen and women, as well as the citizens to make it all work. I could have whined and gotten released, but this was a inconvenience to me, not a full blown hardship. My problems are minor to what the defendant has, or the victims have. It sounds like you've been down this road Irving as well, care to share your thoughts?
RblDiver
11-17-2013, 00:38
The $50 a day you get just doesn't cut it,lol.
My boss's boss said his ex-wife was on the Jon Benet Ramsey grand jury. They were doing their thing for a year, and he said it was good he had a job due to that tiny "salary" jurors get.
Zundfolge
11-17-2013, 11:27
...I wish my first jury service would have been something much milder, instead of a trial by fire...
Yeah, you got the next to the worst case scenario (the worst case is a high profile murder trial that goes on for months like OJ or the Aurora shooter).
99% of people chosen for juries get easy 1-3 day cases.
If in a year when I am available to be summoned again, and I get picked, I'll gladly do my duty again. It may be an inconvenience, but it is a responsibility of every American. It is what seperates our country from everyone elses, and for it to work, it requires a sacrifice from us. Freedom is not free, and it takes our servicemen and women, as well as the citizens to make it all work.
I'm glad that you've taken that attitude because too may of our fellow Americans just want to shirk any sense of duty from their lives and without people making sacrifices our system just doesn't work. Of course it's real easy for people that have never served on a jury or served on one of the "easy" typical 1-3 day trials to come out all gung-ho for the sacrifice so it's encouraging to see someone that REALLY sacrificed to be on a jury have such a positive attitude about it.
I'm fortunate in that I have a boss that pays full pay for up to 3 days of jury duty ... and I have enough vacation time I would get paid for most of a 3 week stint so I wouldn't suffer much ... but I'm also really glad I've never been called for a long trial.
streetglideok
11-17-2013, 14:09
The law requires your employer to pay you for up to the first three days of service, at your regular pay. However in the fine print it actually says up to $50 a day. I didn't make my boss read that part,lol.
Sounds like I might need to change my preferred carry cartridge from Speer Gold Dot to Hornady Critical Defense.
streetglideok
11-18-2013, 23:23
Sounds like I might need to change my preferred carry cartridge from Speer Gold Dot to Hornady Critical Defense.
I have only the visual experience of the Hornady ammo, so I can not say how the Gold Dot does in real life. I will say though, and apologizing for sounding cold hearted, it performed as you would dream or want. In each case, it penetrated until it struck vitals, or hit hard bone(leg). Over penetration was a non-issue in the case of the 9mm. I already had some Critical Defense in 380 acp, and a box of it in 45acp that a coworker bought me for xmas last year. I'll be buying more of it for the 40S&W now. I would say it is a very safe choice. The only thing that bothered me, was a female juror who was inexperienced with firearms. She was almost mortified about the hollow point bullet, and why they make it. I could see a sad situation with a jury of people like her, and no one to set them straight, condemning an innocent man because he used hollowpoints for self defense.
From this whole situation, part of the reason I have gone into a lot of detail of what went on in the trial, is because self defense was brought up, and it would be silly to say no one on here believes in the right to defending themselves. The defense laid the strategy of putting doubt in our mind and claiming this was a self defense shooting, and the police botched the investigation, and because of that, no guns were found. The defense witness testimony didn't jive, so we crossed out what they said. We looked at who was shot, where, and how they were shot. Do not shoot someone who is not an immediate threat to you. If you do shoot someone who is, do not stand over them and pump more lead into them once they are down. Regardless of how meaningless it may seem, it will convey a bad message to a jury. If the guy has a gun, that is an immediate threat. If four gangbangers are fixing to pound your face in, and subject you to serious bodily harm, then you have a chance but don't gun them down 2 car lengths away. They better be close to you to make the threat seem real. If you're standing next to your car, and have a means to leave, even if you do not have to technically flee, it also sends a bad message to a jury. These are some of the things that the other jurors responded to negatively, and I felt were worth mentioning. Also found it interesting at what they will and will not do gun shot residue tests on and how that can help, or hurt a defendant.
Yeah, why was there special mention on testing for gun shot residue? Can you expand on that at all?
streetglideok
11-19-2013, 07:17
CSPD collected GSR samples, regardless of if they are tested or not, just as a precaution. The defense tried to beat the prosecution up, because those samples were not analyzed, and could have proven someone else had shot a revolver or something. The prosecution brought in a line of forensic witnesses however, that demonstrated the uselessness of it. CBI won't run the tests in certain situations due to staffing and resource constraints. Basically, because of the wind at the scene, being an outdoor scene, shots fired in multiple directions, most everyone there would have tested positive for GSR, because of it being airborne. They said it can eject as far as 60ft from the muzzle, straight forward. GSR doesn't prove or disprove if someone shot a gun, just that they were in the presence of the material found typically in most primers. If you shoot someone, they will likely not run tests on the victim because they will have GSR on them basically. Under unique circumstances, they may, but they said they were not aware of any in recent memory. They also can not tell if you shot or not based on the amount of GSR present, because they are doing more or less swabs on whatever they are testing. They are not doing a direct test.
Kraven251
11-19-2013, 08:55
I was summoned for both State and Federal jury selection within about 2 months of each other when I lived in PA. It pissed me off though, because as soon as they asked the family in LE or family convicted of a felony (though later expunged), questions I was out the door.
It is one of those things, everyone has family somewhere in the military, LE, or that found themselves on the wrong side of the law. I have really never understood why that disqualifies so often.
theGinsue
05-13-2014, 18:52
Dead thread resurrection.
I got my Jury Summons a couple of weeks ago. I made my call tonight to see if I have to report tomorrow & YEP, I'm in the roundup.
I wonder if my agreement with Jury Nullification will disqualify me from actually serving.
It will, unless the Judge really wants you to be there, I hope you don't get my luck, I had a 3 1/2 Day trial. Fun stuff when you only get payed by the hour, but then again, there are more out there that have to sacrifice more than me, so I am not going to moan about it.
Dead thread resurrection.
I got my Jury Summons a couple of weeks ago. I made my call tonight to see if I have to report tomorrow & YEP, I'm in the roundup.
I wonder if my agreement with Jury Nullification will disqualify me from actually serving.
Doubt they'll ask you about it.
theGinsue
05-13-2014, 22:50
Doubt they'll ask you about it.
Perhaps directly, but if they ask if I have any beliefs or for any reason may be unable to render a verdict in accordance with the law - my agreement with the concept of jury nullification who require me to say "yes".
Isn't jury nullification in accordance with the law? Don't all the other jurors have to agree in order to put that into effect?
The real question though is:
1) Will you knowingly answer in a way that will get you kicked out, and abandon the possible opportunity to put a nullification into action on a case that needs it? What is the point of arming yourself with the knowledge of jury nullification, only to make sure that you'll never have the opportunity to use it?
theGinsue
05-14-2014, 19:14
Frankly, I don't care one way or the other if I am required to serve; it is a necessary duty to preserve a free society.
The concept of jury nullification isn't something I've "armed myself with" to avoid serving. I simply agree with nullification - when the situation warrants it.
I have very strong opinions. Personally, I wouldn't want ME on a jury if I were a prosecutor, or a defense attorney (depending on the case).
As it turns out, we started with 6 judges names needing jurors and about 300 prospective jurors. Whether due to plea deals or continuances, all 6 names were removed over the course of a couple of hours and every prospective juror was released without actually have to sit on a jury.
The concept of jury nullification isn't something I've "armed myself with" to avoid serving. I simply agree with nullification - when the situation warrants it.
I just want to make it clear that I wasn't trying to suggest that you said anything about trying to get out of not serving. Unless, you would only bring up jury nullification as a way to get out of serving.
theGinsue
05-14-2014, 21:07
I understood your intent Stu. No offense was taken. I felt a little more clarification of my feelings was due.
3beansalad
10-28-2014, 10:48
The only time I've actually made it to the jury selection portion, the homicide detective was one of my best Army buddies. And the rest of the cops were guys I have had beers with over the years. The defense attorney didn't want me in the room any longer. I wish I could serve but my background and circle of friends tends to limit the possibility of my selection.
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
I feel sorry for those jurors that had to show up for my dad's sealtbelt ticket trial in Helotes, TX. What a joke.
I feel sorry for those jurors that had to show up for my dad's sealtbelt ticket trial in Helotes, TX. What a joke.
Did he beat the rap? Do you know what the maximum penalty for a seatbelt infraction was in Helotes, TX?
Did he beat the rap? Do you know what the maximum penalty for a seatbelt infraction was in Helotes, TX?
Yes. His ticket was $200 if I remember correctly. The city attorney had him go to their office twice to do the "pay a lower fine" routine and he offered to pay them $60 and just go away. They insisted on $125, so they set a trial date, provided him the officer's statement and the dash cam footage.
The officer was passing him in the opposing direction and said he saw him without the belt.
He drives a dump truck, and it you look at that type of vehicle, it is extremely difficult to tell if the belt is present. Black belt on a black shirt. He took high quality photos of him sitting in the truck with belt on, at several angles and exposures. You cant see in that truck.
In the end, the officer was caught in a fib. He testified that he distinctly remembers him wearing the lap belt, but not the shoulder. It is a one piece belt. That officer writes more tickets in that town than all of the other officers combined.
As funny as it is, my dad has another pending ticket in Grey Forest, TX for not having a rear plate. He has combo tags on the truck. Rear plates are not issued by the DMV.
Yes. His ticket was $200 if I remember correctly. The city attorney had him go to their office twice to do the "pay a lower fine" routine and he offered to pay them $60 and just go away. They insisted on $125, so they set a trial date, provided him the officer's statement and the dash cam footage...
Interesting. Has your Dad considered sitting down with the police chief or an elected official to discuss the perjury allegation? Maybe they would make him an offer. Someone needs to fight the obvious fund raising efforts used by local jurisdictions.
Thanks for the information.
Interesting. Has your Dad considered sitting down with the police chief or an elected official to discuss the perjury allegation? Maybe they would make him an offer. Someone needs to fight the obvious fund raising efforts used by local jurisdictions.
Thanks for the information.
I doubt he will. He doesn't really like to go out of his way for that kind of thing. The city may or may not see an additional "my time" fee on their next few loads of road base though.
Got on from the city. Usually it is the county. Thought it was kind of odd. I'll known in about 3 weeks if I have to serve. Been on one jury for a day, got released by phone a couple times and in person on another. My wife and I are easily the most summoned people we know, by a long shot. Getting ridiculous.
Oddly enough, I've had several cases of 18 USC 1001 prosecuted as well as 18 USC 471 and 472. Although 472, uttering is much easier to prove.
Just remember, Martha Stewart went to jail for lying to federal agents. So did Scooter Libby, but you are right, they are not routinely prosecuted charges.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.