Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46

Thread: Called for Jury Duty..

  1. #1
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098

    Called for Jury Duty..

    Yeah, I deferred it last year. While I really feel that this is going to be a waste of time trial, etc.. I am going to suck it up and do it.

    Do you think I would be out of line e-mailing the proper people at the courthouse to find out if they have a method of "checking in" sidearms so that I do not have to leave mine at home? Or maybe this would be stirring up the bees nest? I am still uncomfortable leaving mine in the car even locked up.

  2. #2
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    I don't see what the big deal is. You can also ask if there's a Presiding Judge Order Banning Firearms for the courthouse. I'm not sure how'd you get your firearm inside the front door of a courthouse legally though. Maybe they have lockboxes on the outside somewhere?

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    How about calling from a pay phone?

    Remember to wear gloves and a mask to keep saliva off the phone's mic - just in case they check.

    I hear one of those voice disguisers are handy, too.

    Just remember to keep your opinions to yourself until you get the jury charge and go into the back to deliberate. No sense getting excused/thrown off before you could be useful.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    348
    when i lived in philadelphia you were not allowed cell phones or gun past the lobby of the courthouse.... the line to check in a cell phone was always over 100 people but only 3 or 4 to lock up your sidearm. i always slipped my cell into the basket with my pistol and mags.

  5. #5
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    I am not concerned about my privacy via email. My email server is mine and under my control. The best someone could do is lookup the registrar information for my domain and they only information they would get is what they already have (name and address).

    Since carrying (either OC or CC) I haven't gone a day without my side arm, and I feel uncomfortable without now. Funny how that works.

    Just was hoping that by asking the question they don't consider it a threat or something stupid and unfounded along those lines.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by VW_Factor View Post
    I am not concerned about my privacy via email. My email server is mine and under my control. The best someone could do is lookup the registrar information for my domain and they only information they would get is what they already have (name and address).

    Since carrying (either OC or CC) I haven't gone a day without my side arm, and I feel uncomfortable without now. Funny how that works.

    Just was hoping that by asking the question they don't consider it a threat or something stupid and unfounded along those lines.

    I believe the Multnomah County Courthouse does not provide lock boxes, but I can't find where I read this at. I'm not sure of other courthouses, it would be nice if they did though. Maybe have someone drop you off at the entrance and pickup when it's over and rearm in car?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Salem, OR
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by VW_Factor View Post
    I am not concerned about my privacy via email. My email server is mine and under my control. The best someone could do is lookup the registrar information for my domain and they only information they would get is what they already have (name and address).

    Since carrying (either OC or CC) I haven't gone a day without my side arm, and I feel uncomfortable without now. Funny how that works.

    Just was hoping that by asking the question they don't consider it a threat or something stupid and unfounded along those lines.
    Since I am guessing you are in Marion County the Marion County Courthouse said the answer is no. They wont even do it for off-duty LEO's
    Last edited by Historyman1942; 08-11-2011 at 07:42 PM.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Don't forget to bone-up on your rights and powers as a juror; the judge won't let anybody--especially the defense--tell you after the trial starts. The rationale (specious) seems to be that jurors should/supposed to know all that before the trial starts. No harm in taking them up on it and learning it before trial.

    Read Section I of this essay and you will know more about jury powers than 99% of the population, and certainly far more than the government would be comfortable with:

    http://lysanderspooner.org/node/35


    And the articles and flyers at the Fully Informed Jury Association: http://fija.org/

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    162

    Thumbs down Oh PUHLEEEZE!!!

    Don't inject the FIJA nonsense into the equation. Go be a juror, follow the law (NOT FIJA links on the internet - none have any credibility), follow the judge's instructions (they've been agreed upon by the plaintiff/state's attorney and the defense attorney, or the argument over what's appropriate has already been ruled on by the judge before the trial), and vote your consciense BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND LAW PRESENTED!!!

    FIJA freaks are numerous, yet none have any legal credentials beyond their own declarations, and "jury nullification," though it happens on its own when there is a sympathetic defendant, has been completely overruled, run out, and stomped to death in every state. Defendants are even prosecuted (successfully) for passing out FIJA literature to jurors.

    If you want to disrupt the entire history of jurisprudence in the United States, you better declare your unwillingness to follow the judge's jury instructions from the get-go and leave the system to those who take it seriously.

    Keep things on topic, please, Mods!

  10. #10
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    @DCR

    Excuse me for asking.. However... What exactly do you hold against FIJA? Did they steal you lunch money or something?

  11. #11
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Quote Originally Posted by DCR View Post
    Go be a juror, follow the law (NOT FIJA links on the internet - none have any credibility)
    Can you provide a citation regarding what the law demands a juror do? I'm not aware of any civil or criminal laws which force a juror to behave in a certain way (outside of disrupting the courtroom or other similar things). I'm interested in knowing what jurors must do.

    follow the judge's instructions
    Is this law? Can you provide a citation? Or is this what one should do according to your opinion?

    (they've been agreed upon by the plaintiff/state's attorney and the defense attorney, or the argument over what's appropriate has already been ruled on by the judge before the trial)
    So theoretically if a judge issued jury instructions that conflicted with the wording of the law, what should the jurors do? If we assume that jurors are bound by the law to follow a judge's instructions, the jury should rule against the defendant despite the fact of what the law says? That doesn't sound right.

    and vote your consciense BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND LAW PRESENTED!!!
    What if it is a bad law? Like if a person was loaded open carrying inside a school zone without a license. Would you find that person guilty?

    FIJA freaks are numerous, yet none have any legal credentials beyond their own declarations, and "jury nullification," though it happens on its own when there is a sympathetic defendant, has been completely overruled, run out, and stomped to death in every state.
    Citation? Let's say the jurors in the OJ Simpson trial were nullifying the charges for whatever reason. Was their decision overruled? How can the state overrule a judgment issued by a jury? Wouldn't that subject somebody to double jeopardy? Additionally, since you are placing a great deal of importance on legal credentials, what are your legal credentials?


    Defendants are even prosecuted (successfully) for passing out FIJA literature to jurors.
    Citation?

    If you want to disrupt the entire history of jurisprudence in the United States, you better declare your unwillingness to follow the judge's jury instructions from the get-go and leave the system to those who take it seriously.
    Aren't jury instructions issued to a jury at the end of a trial? How would a juror know what the instructions would be?

    I'm curious as to what you have to say about the Supreme Court case of Sparf and Hansen v. U.S., 156 U.S. 51 (1895). Here's a quote from the majority opinion:
    Chief Justice Jay is reported to have said: 'It may not be amiss here, gentlemen, to remind you of the good old rule that on questions of fact it is the province of the jury, on questions of law it is the province of the court, to decide. But it must be observed that, by the same law which recognizes this reasonable distribution of jurisdiction, you have, nevertheless, a right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy
    As you may know, Chief Justice Jay was one of the authors of the federalist papers. He probably knew a thing or two about the reasons behind the way the U.S. Constitution was written.

    And here's an excerpt from a dissenting opinion:
    The judge, by instructing the jury that they were bound to accept the law as given to them by the court, denied their right to decide the law. And by instructing them that, if a felonious homicide by the defendants was proved, there was nothing in the case to reduce it below the grade of murder, and they could not properly find it to be manslaughter, and by declining to submit to them the question whether the defendants were guilty of manslaughter only, he denied their right to decide the fact. The colloquy between the judge and the jurors, when they came in for further instructions, clearly shows that the jury, after deliberating upon the case, were in doubt whether the crime which the defendants had committed was murder or manslaughter; and that it was solely by reason of these instructions of the judge that they returned a verdict of the higher crime.

    It is our deep and settled conviction, confirmed by a re-examination of the authorities under the responsibility of taking part in the consideration and decision of the capital case now before the court, that the jury, upon the general issue of guilty or not guilty in a criminal case, have the right, as well as the power, to decide, according to their own judgment and consciences, all questions, whether of law or of fact, involved in that issue.
    As you can see, both sides in this case are saying the jury can judge the facts of the case as well as the law itself. Has this case been overturned? What case overturned it?

    I'm also curious about your thoughts as to why a jury of one's peers is required by the U.S. Constitution to find a person guilty of criminal offenses? Why not just have 12 judges? Surely that would make the entire judicial system much more efficient. The "jurors" would already be experts in the law and would make fewer mistakes, would they not?

    I eagerly await your reply.
    Last edited by bigtoe416; 08-12-2011 at 05:13 PM. Reason: Adding additional SCOTUS quote, correctly labeling dissenting quote.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Ironbar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Tigard, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    385

    Seriously?

    Getting back to the original question, I can't believe you're really asking it. Guns aren't allowed in court buildings, period. Don't ask them if they have a way to check your gun, THEY DON'T! Either leave the thing at home or get over your phobia about leaving it in the car. End of discussion.

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtoe416 View Post
    SNIP As you can see, both sides in this case are saying the jury can judge the facts of the case as well as the law itself. Has this case been overturned? What case overturned it?
    Can't have been overturned. Even if a court claimed authority to overturn a right, it would be a lie.

    The rights and powers of a juror pre-date the Founding. Just like the 2A does not confer a right; it merely describes a right that already existed.

    The government cannot abolish a right, although it may try.

    If anyone hasn't, read the first section of the essay I linked above. A very erudite analysis of the purpose, powers, rights, and protections offered by a jury. In just a few paragraphs, the author really lays it out.

    Signed,

    FIJA Freak

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by DCR View Post
    SNIP If you want to disrupt the entire history of jurisprudence in the United States, you better declare your unwillingness to follow the judge's jury instructions from the get-go and leave the system to those who take it seriously.
    Oh? So you take seriously the perpetuation of bad laws created by self-interested legislators, enforced by self-interested police? And, a judicial system that seeks to abolish a threat to its power by nullifying a power of a jury?

    Tell that to the jurors in William Penn's trial who spent time in jail--in jail--sent there by the judges, to be held "without fire, meat, and tobacco," to coerce them into changing their not-guilty verdict. A few of who were then prosecuted for resisting Penn's judges. Oh, and tell that also to the people who have some measure of religious freedom because Penn's juror's wouldn't cave in to the judges' demand for a guilty verdict. All despite the fact that Penn did break the law and preach Quakerism in the street after his church had been shuttered by law.

    This is all well documented history (the Brits still have some transcript of Penn's trial.) And, I'm the one who has nothing but my own declarations?

    --FIJA Freak


    Hmmmm. People have a 6A right to a jury trial. This means people have a right to a trial by jury with all the accessories that went along with a jury. So, its not only the members of the jury whose rights and powers are infringed by a judge who denies jurors judging the law; included is the defendant.
    Last edited by Citizen; 08-12-2011 at 08:47 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Historyman1942 View Post
    Since I am guessing you are in Marion County the Marion County Courthouse said the answer is no. They wont even do it for off-duty LEO's
    Its interesting, because reading around some websites. It appears a few courthouses actually have ways for citizens (and off duty LEO) to check the weapon and have a proper area to lock it up. Which brings on the question.. Why have other courthouses not done this?

  16. #16
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Ironbar View Post
    Getting back to the original question, I can't believe you're really asking it. Guns aren't allowed in court buildings, period. Don't ask them if they have a way to check your gun, THEY DON'T! Either leave the thing at home or get over your phobia about leaving it in the car. End of discussion.
    Why is it bad to ask questions? Does it offend you, or are you worried others might be offended?

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    162

    Okay, all the FIJA freaks

    Want to get into a d*ck measuring contest? I'll pit my three degrees (yes, one in law), federal and several state bar memberships, and 21 years of practice against any and all of you. You won't win - even if you are OC'ing!

    Quoting dicta out of context is not refutation of what I've asserted.

    Not being willing to live by the laws your elected representatives have enacted is sedition and treason - how you feel about yourselves now? Stop voting for the idiots you keep electing if you don't like the laws - vote the other party for sh*ts & giggles - you might end up more free!

    You clearly don't understand trial dynamics - good attorneys ask the jury during voir dire (before the trial, for the FIJA freaks) whether they can and will abide by the instructions that will be given by the judge. The FIJA freaks that don't like jury instructions haven't read thoroughly what I wrote or have a warped, misguided and simplistic, sophistic understanding of history and jurisprudence. Go back to school, fools!

    Finally, quoting federalist papers - written pre-constitution, and claiming they were written a hundred years later doesn't enhance your credibility, bub.

    Too many T-holes frequent this board - FIJA freaks, neocon wannabe-constitutionalist "scholars," and the idiots who think they are "freemen" who don't need to pay taxes, register their cars, obtain driver's licenses, purchase liability insurance, misquote sections of the UCC and court decisions, believe that the government is a corporation so they can use the UCC to evade laws duly enacted by the people, think that fringe on a flag deprives a state court of jurisdiction to stuff their freemen attitudes down their throats and force them to abide by the laws everyone else in the world does, that the use of capital letters in a criminal or civil summons renders the whole pleading invalid because of their nonsensical idea that it invokes the UCC, etc., etc., etc.

    If the moderators of this board want to keep it even remotely credible for the users, they would be well-served to block such users, or make the background of such posts bright yellow so everyone can know it was written by a whacko.

    Good day - and should I ever meet you in court, bring a soft cushion and preparation H - you'll need it, if not from me, from the judge, or the Bubbas you'll be spending time with for contempt of court for bringing in FIJA or other whacko theories.

  18. #18
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    @DCR

    Take your piss poor attitude somewhere else.

  19. #19
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Hopefully you provide more citations in your legal briefs and you don't constantly berate jurors by calling them names. For some reason you think it's fine for you to behave like a jerk online. That's fine, but I doubt you'll be convincing anybody of anything anytime soon.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    348
    the best thing about america is the freedom of speech , backed by our right to bear arms. we also can pursue happiness. some people do so by printing long winded diatribes to refute other posts that are irrelevant to the original topic. said internet users are what we used to call dime store cowboys. its easier now to list your credentials anonymously from the cool dusty darkness of their moms basement when they are taking a break from playing world or warcraft.

    i myself am a ninja.
    Last edited by Teddybearfrmhell; 08-14-2011 at 10:44 AM.

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by DCR View Post
    SNIP Not being willing to live by the laws your elected representatives have enacted is sedition and treason - how you feel about yourselves now?
    Oh! Some lawyer you must be. Sedition and treason have definitions. Neither fit being unwilling to live by the laws of elected representatives. Oh, noes! Anyone who ever wanted to repeal a law is a traitor! And a seditionist, to boot! Hang them! Hang them!

    Bwahahahahahahahahahahaahaaa!!

    FIJA Freak
    Last edited by Citizen; 08-13-2011 at 10:11 PM.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by DCR View Post
    SNIP You clearly don't understand trial dynamics - good attorneys ask the jury during voir dire (before the trial, for the FIJA freaks) whether they can and will abide by the instructions that will be given by the judge. The FIJA freaks that don't like jury instructions haven't read thoroughly what I wrote or have a warped, misguided and simplistic, sophistic understanding of history and jurisprudence. Go back to school, fools!
    Oh? Then, if jurors don't have the power to judge the law, why are trial attorneys so concerned about it? Thank you for confessing its existence and legal attempts to quash it.

    Bwahahahahahahahahaaa!

    FIJA Freak

    By the way, what is all this naked, high-octane hostility? You seem to be working pretty hard to discredit jury nullification, showing far more hostility than needed for a mere scholarly refutation of a right. Is there something you're not telling us? Something you'd rather we didn't know about?

  23. #23
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by DCR View Post
    SNIP Quoting dicta out of context is not refutation of what I've asserted.
    Bwahahahahahahahahaaa!!

    That's right, its our job to show your assertions are wrong, rather than you provide cites showing the jury power to judge the law was legislated out of existence.

    As to your nasty little discussion about needing a soft cushion and Preparation H, you must have missed the little problem out west earlier this year when jury nullification set in before the jury was even empanelled. The prosecution, during voir dire, couldn't find enough jurors from the pool who were not against the law. The prosecution gave up. This was not a case of a few jurors on a jury. This was the prosecution being unable to find twelve from the entire jury pool.

    FIJA Freak

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by DCR View Post
    SNIP If the moderators of this board want to keep it even remotely credible for the users, they would be well-served to block such users, or make the background of such posts bright yellow so everyone can know it was written by a whacko.
    What? Are you running for a judgeship somewhere?

    Remotely creditable? Oh, my.

    Lotsa unnecessary heat in your recent posts. Exaggeration. Hyper-hyperbole. Marking posts to identify cranks (says a lot about your belief in the ability of your fellow man to identify ideas you don't like). I don't think we're the whackos. But, I'll wear the label for a bit.

    FIJA Freaking Whacko

    Bwahahahahahahahaahahaaa!!

  25. #25
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Ummmmmmm

    Can anyone (like maybe you DCR) cite the law that inflicts ANY penalty upon a juror who walks into deliberations and, disregarding the FACTS and the LAW that point to the the abolute guilt of the accused (we will assume these FACTS and GUILT for the benefit of discussion) votes with his conscious (or whatever other reason) to AQUIT?

    I didn't think so.

    As a Juror our DUTY is to listen and view the evidence presented and do WHATS RIGHT and that may not always be what the law, the judge, public opinion, or the raskly lawyers say.

    Been there, DONE THAT (public opinion) and stood my ground....along with 7 other jurors who were absolutely floored that 3 jurors voted against the defendant (in a civil trial) because "he has insurance and it won't hurt him, those poor people lost everything". The small town was pissed about the verdict but WE DID THE RIGHT THING in convincing two of those 3 jurors that that wasn't the right reason.

    Now that was a matter of going against public opinion but it's the same thing when it's going against an unjust law or screwed up jury instruction.

    And jury instructions are NOT everything the defense and the prosecution wants put in them. Judges routinely deny any instructions that explain the TRUE duties of a juror.

    signed

    FIJA Freak #2
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •