Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NJ.com)   Person #1: Isn't it amazing how I can use my cell phone to get coverage about things that just happened in this murder trial? Person #2: You mean the one we're serving as jurors on?   (nj.com) divider line
    More: Dumbass, The Star-Ledger, street gangs, Crips, Elizabeth, Judge Joseph Perfilio, pedals, jury, murders  
•       •       •

10136 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 May 2010 at 7:35 PM (11 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



50 Comments     (+0 »)
 
2010-05-25 5:10:12 PM  
They let jurors bring mobile phones? That is the real news here.
 
2010-05-25 5:45:27 PM  
Kick Person #1 in the nuts and get back to work on a trial.
 
2010-05-25 6:01:59 PM  
beefjack.comView Full Size

What a crappy prequel!
 
2010-05-25 7:15:17 PM  
Crips?

What the hell!? Can't them come up with something original?
 
2010-05-25 7:43:38 PM  
Hang up and drive act like a responsible adult!
 
2010-05-25 7:44:03 PM  
i just had jury duty so i'm getting a kick out of this
 
2010-05-25 7:44:46 PM  
I've heard of wireless internet being available in the jury pool waiting room. Hmmmm, I wonder why I'm here......
 
2010-05-25 7:45:00 PM  
IDK, I was just calling my bff jill to tell her how the trial was going.
 
2010-05-25 7:45:25 PM  

tototototo: They let jurors bring mobile phones? That is the real news here.


I just got a jury summons and it says I can bring my laptop and they'll provide wifi.
 
2010-05-25 7:46:28 PM  
What's with the names? Is this a trial for children of the corn?
 
2010-05-25 7:46:35 PM  

SobrietyFighter: i just had jury duty so i'm getting a kick out of this


My buddy just got charged with premeditated murder, so me too!
 
2010-05-25 7:50:51 PM  

SobrietyFighter: i just had jury duty so i'm getting a kick out of this


I'm posting this from the juror's box right now.
 
2010-05-25 7:52:10 PM  
Too stupid or willful to follow simple instructions, but deciding somebody's fate. Swell.
 
2010-05-25 7:52:45 PM  
lol, what nubs.

Now we did have to give up our phones to the bailiff when we went to deliberate, but I did have my Bluetooth headset in my pocket.

Could have put that sucker on and held it in to redial someone.
 
2010-05-25 7:53:56 PM  

sexy-fetus: tototototo: They let jurors bring mobile phones? That is the real news here.

I just got a jury summons and it says I can bring my laptop and they'll provide wifi.



That's just for the sitting around and waiting part. You can't have that shiat on during the trial.

At the beginning of every trial, a bailiff should collect all the jurors' cell phones. Any juror caught with a cell phone during the trial is found to be in contempt of court and gets fined or jailed for a couple days.

Yes, we all love our cell phones, and we "need" them for emergencies. Somehow people managed without them for thousands of years, so jurors should be OK while they're sitting in court.
 
2010-05-25 7:57:39 PM  
Sounds like a good backup way to get out of jury duty if you screwed up and find yourself selected for trial.
 
2010-05-25 7:59:47 PM  
What exactly is the problem? The jurors have already heard everything in the article because they have front row seats to the whole shebang. I understand keeping jurors out of contact with the public to prevent tampering, but unless a newspaper owner just blatantly has all articles written with pleas to fry the bastard in them, what is the problem? You have two sides, both of which crow endlessly about it being an adversarial process of two sides trying to blow the most smoke up the jury's ass. So we have two South American soccer teams thrashing around on the ground, while the ref (the jury) is supposed to make a decision while hogtied and blindfolded. The jury should get its own attorney and its own turn to have him grill any witnesses (with exactly zero objections allowed from the two mud-slingers out front) - if the sociopathic fascist and the anarachist deathcultist get to lie and obfuscate, the guys trying desperately to fill Solomon's booties out to also get a go; instead we gimp the only party actually trying (in theory) to work out guilt or not-guilt (the God-complex idiot-savant in the robe being too busy masturbating to really count).

/Served on juries. Happy to do it. But pissy that both sides admit they want to bald-faced lie to me, but I am supposed to make a decision based on what both agree is damaged info. GIGO you bastards
 
2010-05-25 8:05:56 PM  

AnubisMan: SobrietyFighter: i just had jury duty so i'm getting a kick out of this

My buddy just got charged with premeditated murder, so me too!


Might be time to find new friends
 
2010-05-25 8:08:45 PM  

phalamir: What exactly is the problem? The jurors have already heard everything in the article because they have front row seats to the whole shebang.


Sometimes the media prints things that end up not being allowed as evidence in court. You're supposed to make a decision based solely on what's provided as evidence or testimony in the trial, not what the newspaper says. I may be wrong about this, but that was always my impression.

I just had jury duty on Monday. Almost got trapped in an elevator at the courthouse. Cool story.
 
2010-05-25 8:18:23 PM  
I didn't so much care about the phone thing when I had jury duty. The thing that ticked me off was not being able to take notes. There is absolutely no way I remember things from day one ... three days later.

Additionally, did anyone else have a weird sense of power being a juror? I was just apart of a district court case, but was treated great; the lawyers would stop talking and look at you when you walked by - they brought you food every day and let you smoke inside - everyone would be quite and cordial to you when you walked into the court room. It was awesome!
 
2010-05-25 8:26:32 PM  

phalamir: What exactly is the problem? The jurors have already heard everything in the article because they have front row seats to the whole shebang. I understand keeping jurors out of contact with the public to prevent tampering, but unless a newspaper owner just blatantly has all articles written with pleas to fry the bastard in them, what is the problem? You have two sides, both of which crow endlessly about it being an adversarial process of two sides trying to blow the most smoke up the jury's ass. So we have two South American soccer teams thrashing around on the ground, while the ref (the jury) is supposed to make a decision while hogtied and blindfolded. The jury should get its own attorney and its own turn to have him grill any witnesses (with exactly zero objections allowed from the two mud-slingers out front) - if the sociopathic fascist and the anarachist deathcultist get to lie and obfuscate, the guys trying desperately to fill Solomon's booties out to also get a go; instead we gimp the only party actually trying (in theory) to work out guilt or not-guilt (the God-complex idiot-savant in the robe being too busy masturbating to really count).

/Served on juries. Happy to do it. But pissy that both sides admit they want to bald-faced lie to me, but I am supposed to make a decision based on what both agree is damaged info. GIGO you bastards


News stories frequently have paraphrases and summaries which may or may not be accurate. They emphasize some testimony to the exclusion of other testimony. They frequently blur the line between assertion of fact and fact, and many people are conditioned to treat the printed word as fact. And those are just the problems when an article does nothing but talk about actual testimony. But articles also often talk about what has happened before in the case and what people have said outside of court, and otherwise talk about non-admissible things. The parties don't get a chance to challenge the admissibility of any of that, or to cross-examine.
 
2010-05-25 8:26:38 PM  

binkyman: Might be time to find new friends


Well, he is in jail now, can't really drink beer in the visitation room...
 
2010-05-25 8:35:44 PM  
What were they expecting to read? They were LITERALLY sitting in the courtroom! They don't need to be told what happened! Goddamn morons.
 
2010-05-25 8:40:23 PM  

HellRaisingHoosier: I didn't so much care about the phone thing when I had jury duty. The thing that ticked me off was not being able to take notes. There is absolutely no way I remember things from day one ... three days later.


Really? I had jury duty last month; we each got a yellow pad and a pen to take notes with, although the judge's instructions cautioned us not to focus on taking notes to the exclusion of paying attention to the testimony.

She also read us a statement before court wrapped up the first day. We were instructed not to talk to friends, family, or anyone else about the case. That included not only face-to-face communication, but also telephonic communication. And text messaging. And blogging. And tweeting. And social network site communication. Nothing. The fact that she had to list each and every method of communication tells me that some idiot caused a mistrial "because you said I couldn't TALK to my friends, you didn't say I couldn't TWEET!"

We also got to pass the evidence around the jury room. That heroin was mighty titillating to some of the older ladies on the panel. Woooo, DRUGS!
 
2010-05-25 8:43:27 PM  
Oh, and HellRaisingHoosier, I didn't mean I don't believe you. Just in interesting difference in local court procedures. The trial I was on was only a couple of days, and I probably could have gotten by without taking any notes, but there was another jury there on their fourth week. I don't know how you'd keep a case like that straight without having something jotted down.
 
2010-05-25 8:57:01 PM  
I just got released from having to serve in the Eve Carson murder trial, so I'm getting a kick...

(thank you for pleading guilty, you piece of shiat, you saved us all a lot of time.)
 
2010-05-25 8:57:05 PM  

phalamir: What exactly is the problem? The jurors have already heard everything in the article because they have front row seats to the whole shebang. I understand keeping jurors out of contact with the public to prevent tampering, but unless a newspaper owner just blatantly has all articles written with pleas to fry the bastard in them, what is the problem? You have two sides, both of which crow endlessly about it being an adversarial process of two sides trying to blow the most smoke up the jury's ass. So we have two South American soccer teams thrashing around on the ground, while the ref (the jury) is supposed to make a decision while hogtied and blindfolded. The jury should get its own attorney and its own turn to have him grill any witnesses (with exactly zero objections allowed from the two mud-slingers out front) - if the sociopathic fascist and the anarachist deathcultist get to lie and obfuscate, the guys trying desperately to fill Solomon's booties out to also get a go; instead we gimp the only party actually trying (in theory) to work out guilt or not-guilt (the God-complex idiot-savant in the robe being too busy masturbating to really count).

/Served on juries. Happy to do it. But pissy that both sides admit they want to bald-faced lie to me, but I am supposed to make a decision based on what both agree is damaged info. GIGO you bastards


Agreed. Researching and acquiring information is useful in practically every important decision anyone makes (like buying a house, etc), but apparently the system thinks it's not for jurors... who may be asked to make important decisions indeed, like life or death. Goes hand in had with the judges empowering themselves by being the decision maker on what information should and should not be allowed in a trial.

Read this somewhere: We ask jurors to weigh all presented evidence and information... do they believe it 30%, 70%, 100%? But apparently they are incapable of deciding a 0% weight to evidence, only judges get to do that.
 
2010-05-25 9:04:03 PM  

Dallymo: HellRaisingHoosier: I didn't so much care about the phone thing when I had jury duty. The thing that ticked me off was not being able to take notes. There is absolutely no way I remember things from day one ... three days later.

Really? I had jury duty last month; we each got a yellow pad and a pen to take notes with, although the judge's instructions cautioned us not to focus on taking notes to the exclusion of paying attention to the testimony.

She also read us a statement before court wrapped up the first day. We were instructed not to talk to friends, family, or anyone else about the case. That included not only face-to-face communication, but also telephonic communication. And text messaging. And blogging. And tweeting. And social network site communication. Nothing. The fact that she had to list each and every method of communication tells me that some idiot caused a mistrial "because you said I couldn't TALK to my friends, you didn't say I couldn't TWEET!"

We also got to pass the evidence around the jury room. That heroin was mighty titillating to some of the older ladies on the panel. Woooo, DRUGS!


This. We got the yellow pads, and had to leave them. Evidence playing, etc. I kinda wanted to toss some questions to the attorneys but apparently they don't do that. We did it fairly, and both sides got something, but not all they wanted.

I did managed to skip out of a 2 week sequestering just a little bit ago. That would have wrecked my business, no question at all.

They were quite OK with that. I was expecting a battle. Got the letter back saying 'OK, your'e excused, cya next time!'
 
2010-05-25 9:11:11 PM  

Ken at Popehat: Too stupid or willful to follow simple instructions, but deciding somebody's fate. Swell.


I'm guessing stupid. These are people who couldn't get out of jury duty, after all.

There is some justification for the argument that the jury system needs revamping.
 
2010-05-25 9:18:40 PM  
Dallymo

No offense taken.

By the way, I was curious so I asked one of the folks in the legal department(because they know everything goddammit) why y'all could have notepads and my case couldn't. She told me that note taking and such is up to the judge who is over-seeing the trial.

So there we have it!
 
2010-05-25 9:25:13 PM  

sexy-fetus: tototototo: They let jurors bring mobile phones? That is the real news here.

I just got a jury summons and it says I can bring my laptop and they'll provide wifi.


I've gone down once. I brought my laptop, spent half a day working and then went home. No WiFi at the time but my laptop didn't even have it.

phalamir: What exactly is the problem? The jurors have already heard everything in the article because they have front row seats to the whole shebang. I understand keeping jurors out of contact with the public to prevent tampering, but unless a newspaper owner just blatantly has all articles written with pleas to fry the bastard in them, what is the problem?


The basic problem is if there is evidence that gets talked about in the paper but excluded during the trial.
 
2010-05-25 9:27:41 PM  
Yes: It's 2010, and the judge should've confiscated the cell phones for the duration.
 
2010-05-25 10:13:03 PM  
in florida you may use cell phones and laptops in the deliberation room if you are a jury, but not once deliberations start because at the point the confiscate them. it is kind of an honor policy that before that time you don't discuss the trial or read up on it as you can cause a mistrial if caught. and last I checked using a cell phone or laptop while in the jury box could cause a mistrial as well even before deliberations.
 
2010-05-25 10:14:10 PM  

Ken at Popehat: Too stupid or willful to follow simple instructions, but deciding somebody's fate. Swell.


i dunno if this one deserves a trial. kinda looks like the scum of the earth to me. probably would have been better for all involved if he got killed trying to elude. shooting kids on bikes? shooting someone not clearly identified? just shooting anyone? no,i swear,he was trying to escape and pulled what i thought was a gun. thats how you handle these things.
 
2010-05-25 10:31:22 PM  
I had jury duty just this last April, but we weren't allowed to have our cell phones on, even in the jury room while we were waiting to see if we were going to be called upstairs to one of the courtrooms. We were told that our phones had to be turned completely on. Not on vibrate or silent, but completely off. If we needed to use a phone they provided two landline phones for us. And this was for a civil trial, not a criminal trial.
 
2010-05-25 10:41:14 PM  
HellRaisingHoosier

I've been a juror roughly 6 times in the last 10 years and we've always been allowed to take notes. I'm amazed that you weren't allowed to do so.
 
2010-05-25 10:43:06 PM  
 
2010-05-25 10:54:58 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: HellRaisingHoosier

I've been a juror roughly 6 times in the last 10 years and we've always been allowed to take notes. I'm amazed that you weren't allowed to do so.


I've always wanted to walk in with a football helmet on and forcing myself on the wall!!
\juror three time in last years
\\got away with 20 years by calling the Hoboken cops corrupt!!!!
 
2010-05-25 11:42:08 PM  
"Almost got trapped in an elevator"? Thank God you weren't Almost Raped, CelesX.
 
2010-05-25 11:57:14 PM  

jst3p: Sounds like a good backup way to get out of jury duty if you screwed up and find yourself selected for trial.



Trojan Horse jury nullification, biatch.
 
2010-05-26 1:30:04 AM  

Loren: The basic problem is if there is evidence that gets talked about in the paper but excluded during the trial.


But they tell jurors to ignore certain information they hear in the court all the time because it is ruled inadmissible when one of the two lying bastards figures out it can complain after the evidence is revealed. Do they throw out the jury or excise part of their brain? No, the jury gets told to ignore that and we all go on. Why not "You've read X - you can't use it"? We've already got both sides committing sins of ommission so fast they couldn't get into Heaven with a team of dedicated saints and Jesuits working them over in real time. Why can't the jury hear what they want, then let the judge tell them what is and isn't admissible (and I think that is perfectly okay - that's the meglomanaical ononist's job after all, and he/she ought to be commended for doing it). It still comes down to I am expected to listen to Lenny and Squiggy try to sell me both shiat and Shinola - and then I'm expected to only use evidence and testimony that everyone freely will admit is so shaved, filleted, reconstituted, marinated, and massaged as to constiitute a deli platter to decide someone's fate. They ought to give the jury the ability to question the witnesses, use an attorney to do so effectively, and be able to do its own research on the matter to make an informed judgement on the case (God's eyes, just the abilty to use a court-approved database to fact-check the lawyers would be nice; "Juror 9 would like to point out that Chewbacca is on Endor because he got there in a farking space ship, you fatuous coont")
 
2010-05-26 1:32:50 AM  
When I sat on jury duty our cellphones were confiscated in the Jury Room before Court opened and we were not given them back until after the verdict was read.
 
2010-05-26 2:05:08 AM  
I served as the foreman on a two day DUI trial last month. We were allowed to keep phones/laptops during the trial itself, but the bailiff took them when we went to deliberate. We were allowed to take notes, and the notepads were put in manila folders and taken by the bailiff anytime we left the courtroom except when we actually went to deliberate. The juror waiting area had wi-fi and some other decent amenities, which was to be expected after the obscene amount of money the county spent on the new courthouse.

I guess I'm kind of weird 'cause I found the whole process fascinating, and had no problems at all staying awake and attentive. Of course, that could also have been at least partly due to two of the other jurors being quite smokin' hot.
 
2010-05-26 6:36:24 AM  

jst3p: Sounds like a good backup way to get out of jury duty if you screwed up and find yourself selected for trial.


Or you could just perform your duty.

Would you like to have a jury if you are accused of a crime?
 
2010-05-26 8:40:07 AM  
I served on a jury for a very nasty criminal trial last winter. The judge said at the very beginning that no cell phone usage in the court room, jury room etc, they are to be turned off while in the crim. justice building. Every time the jury retired to the jury room, this one guy just had to call his bf to update him on this horrible waste of his valuable time. I and a couple of other jurors told him he might be breaking some serious rules, and since we had already spent four days on this trial, I for one didn't want a mistrial. All he did was give us all a classic eye roll, like we were a bunch of idiots.

The same day we confronted the guy, he never came back from lunch, and he was replaced by juror #13. Stupid little pr**k. After it was all over, the court crier (?, I forget his title) told us the judge reamed his ass out and threatened to hold him in contempt. To bad the rest of us didn't get to see the judge's rage. We were all glad he didn't get to deliberate. The guy was trouble. Worst of all, he wore Crocks (those plastic shoes?) to court.
 
2010-05-26 8:59:39 AM  

strathmeyer: SobrietyFighter: i just had jury duty so i'm getting a kick out of this

I'm posting this from the juror's box right now.


Ok, verdict is coming out.
 
2010-05-26 9:30:46 AM  

Kalashinator: Ok, verdict is coming out.


+1
 
2010-05-26 11:25:20 AM  

phalamir: Loren: The basic problem is if there is evidence that gets talked about in the paper but excluded during the trial.

But they tell jurors to ignore certain information they hear in the court all the time because it is ruled inadmissible when one of the two lying bastards figures out it can complain after the evidence is revealed. Do they throw out the jury or excise part of their brain? No, the jury gets told to ignore that and we all go on. Why not "You've read X - you can't use it"? We've already got both sides committing sins of ommission so fast they couldn't get into Heaven with a team of dedicated saints and Jesuits working them over in real time. Why can't the jury hear what they want, then let the judge tell them what is and isn't admissible (and I think that is perfectly okay - that's the meglomanaical ononist's job after all, and he/she ought to be commended for doing it). It still comes down to I am expected to listen to Lenny and Squiggy try to sell me both shiat and Shinola - and then I'm expected to only use evidence and testimony that everyone freely will admit is so shaved, filleted, reconstituted, marinated, and massaged as to constiitute a deli platter to decide someone's fate. They ought to give the jury the ability to question the witnesses, use an attorney to do so effectively, and be able to do its own research on the matter to make an informed judgement on the case (God's eyes, just the abilty to use a court-approved database to fact-check the lawyers would be nice; "Juror 9 would like to point out that Chewbacca is on Endor because he got there in a farking space ship, you fatuous coont")


But think about it this way: most jurors are not you. Most of them, in fact, are probably stupid. You cannot trust them to responsibly look up information without it getting vetted by a judge. I trust jurors to make a decision based on the information they are handed and no more.
 
2010-05-26 1:48:37 PM  

Jamieboy: All he did was give us all a classic eye roll, like we were a bunch of idiots.


I think I'd have summoned the bailiff at that point to see how far the eye roll would get with him and the judge. I'm with you - if I've spent four days on a trial, I'm not letting some asshat blow it because he thinks the rules don't apply to him.
 
2010-05-26 4:10:59 PM  
There are still Crips and Bloods? I guess stupid never goes out of style...
 
Displayed 50 of 50 comments


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.