Slashdot Mirror
Racist Woman Given Indefinite Jury Duty
A Brooklyn woman known only as "Juror No. 799" upset a federal judge so much with her racist remarks that he put her on indefinite jury duty. When asked to name three people she admired least the woman answered, "African-Americans, Hispanics and Haitians." When asked why she answered the question that way, she told Federal Judge Nicholas Garaufis, "You always hear about them in the news doing something." Then just for good measure she claimed that "All cops are lazy." Assistant U.S. Attorney Taryn Merkl requested that the woman be disqualified, but Garaufis was not amused saying, "She's coming back [today], Thursday and Friday - and until the future, when I am ready to dismiss her." I look forward to the sitcom based on the case.
Given a couple of recent stories here on Slashdot which involve juries and seem to end up with people discussing various ways of getting out of jury duty (of which 'being openly racist / homophobic' etc seem to be the suggested routes) maybe the judge has also been loitering here and read the same posts?
judicial trolling at its best.
No, it's not. And just in case you get any ideas, jury duty is also completely unlike the holocaust, had nothing to do with Hitler, and wasn't executed or sent to Siberia by Stalin. So just stop it.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
I suspect the judge believes that this woman just said ridiculous nonsense in an attempt to get out of Jury duty. The judge, angry that she's trying to subvert the system by lying to get disqualified, is making her sit the whole thing out despite not actually being a juror. In other words, he wants to send the message that you can't get a free pass out of jury duty in his courtroom simply by pretending to have every bias under the sun.
Death? On which planet is there a death penalty on refusing to do jury duty?
He's a liberal irony-minded judge. They fight crime!
By your logic, you can make crossing the street seem as dangerous as being on death row.
death toll of some random activity/average time it takes == 0.0001%/a few minutes >= death toll of on death row/average time spent there == 95%/many years
Sometimes something is so ridiculous that a simple repudiation is the obvious refutation. Jury duty is a duty. It's not slavery.
Slavery is when work is stolen from a person for no pay. Jury duty is a duty. A duty is an obligation we owe to other people. Therefore jury duty isn't work that is stolen, it's already owed to other people. If a person doesn't perform their duty, then it is they who are stealing from other people.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
What's important is to not look at only the immediate effects, but also the total effects.
If you feel your liberty is being violated by being conscripted for jury 'duty' you might stay home.
If that happens you'll have a warrant put out for your arrest. If you feel that arrest would also violate your liberty, you might resist that arrest, perhaps with force in self-defense. If you're successful in doing so, you'll either immediately or eventually be shot, likely fatally, having your life taken as well as your liberty.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." - Thomas Jefferson
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master." -George Washington
It's possible to have an effective society without the violent conscription of individuals onto juries. We should do that.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
It's possible to have an effective society without the violent conscription of individuals onto juries. We should do that.
No one's stopping you from moving to the PRC.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
No one's stopping you from moving to the PRC.
Right, our government violates its own Constitution, so I should get the hell out. Nice to see the Tories are still alive and well in the US.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
our government violates its own Constitution, so I should get the hell out.
You say that until you're false accused of a crime. Then you'll pray that enough intelligent people willingly perform their civic duty of serving on a jury.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
You say that until you're false accused of a crime. Then you'll pray that enough intelligent people willingly perform their civic duty of serving on a jury.
That's how it's supposed to be. In reality, they disqualify anybody who might be qualified so that the jurors can be easily swayed. Any personal knowledge of the matter or the parties get one a pass (the notion of 'peers' has been completely corrupted) . And they lie to the jury about their rights and duties. I was called for jury duty last year and had to agree to follow all of the judges orders. I told him if he were to give me an order that violated the Constitution or negated the jury's powers I couldn't do that. I was promptly dismissed.
So, the choice is to violate everybody's human rights or to fear, without evidence, that there wouldn't be enough people willing to sit on juries? The ends don't justify the means in a civil society. And, besides, it's only the sheer number of immoral laws that keeps the caseloads so high. There are so many retired people with nothing to do and plenty of people interested in civic action. My local government has far more volunteer members than paid members, and there's never an empty position. Don't underestimate the human spirit.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Slavery is when work is stolen from a person for no pay.
Slaves were paid with room and board. In my State, our Constitution specifies that jurors be "fully compensated for their time, travel, and attendance." At most, they pay a fraction of IRS mileage.
Jury duty is a duty. A duty is an obligation we owe to other people.
This is a tautology. Tell me, how was this obligation created?
If a person doesn't perform their duty, then it is they who are stealing from other people.
This is a statement of a so-called 'positive right'. The USA was founded on the concept of negative reciprocity, explicitly rejecting any 'positive rights' (which were features of the Roosevelt Progressive Era of socialism).
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
In reality, they disqualify anybody who might be qualified so that the jurors can be easily swayed.
When I went through jury selection, I told the lawyers that the Reasonable Doubt is a very high burden for the prosecutor to overcome.
You'd think that she (the prosecutor was a black woman) would have immediately dismissed me for such a pro-defense statement, but didn't happen.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
The obligation is created by reaping all the benefits of being a citizen of the United States. You are better than you would have been otherwise, and for that you owe a duty to your fellow citizens. If you had not wanted this from your fellow citizens, then you shouldn't have taken it.
Now do the duty that you owe to your fellow citizens. We're not chumps. Pay for what you have received.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
Suppose we create something new called "farming duty" where they make a certain class of people toil on other peoples' farmland (we'll call them duty-tations) under threat of prison or whipping for room and board. Sound good?
There are already professional farmers, so your suggestion is as dumb as you are.
The sentence starting with "Suppose we..." is as open ended as it could be. Just because you can complete the sentence doesn't mean it makes any sense as an argument.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
So you'd have no problem being put on trial with no jury? I'm sure those individuals volunteering for jury duty wouldn't be biased at all.
Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
So you'd have no problem being put on trial with no jury? I'm sure those individuals volunteering for jury duty wouldn't be biased at all.
I live in a place where nearly the entire government is run by volunteers, and they may have their own biases, but they operate in a typically fair manner.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
The juror questionnaire (so the lawyers can figure out who to strike) has a lot of personal questions that are designed to try to be proxies to figure out things like racism/sexism.
So if you really aren't interested in being a juror on a particular trial, you can do worse than to simply list your religion as Branch Davidian.
you would be more fair and impartial than the other jury candidates.
Fair and impartial jurors are the last thing they want. They want jurors who can be swayed easily.
Isn't it possible that the judge correctly decided that you were an abrasive, unlikable person
Oh dear, holding someone to the due responsibility of their position and expecting them to carry out their duties lawfully makes me abrasive and unlikable...
jury duty is a duty...it's something you should feel compelled to do without being compelled to do it by outside forces. the benefit is that you are entitled to a trial by jury in the event that you are accused of a crime. this service isn't free. you pay for it by being a juror yourself when called upon. but, alas, i've already failed by responding to a troll.
... but, alas, i've already failed by responding to a troll.
In your defense -- and, I guess, by extension, mine -- it was apparently a really good troll. At least if you can measure success from the size of the response tree.
I am not a crackpot.
the benefit is that you are entitled to a trial by jury in the event that you are accused of a crime
But I don't want a trial by jury of 12 nincompoops who are ignorant of the subject matter and my personal character. This is the result of the compulsory system (and an overabundance of laws), and a complete perversion of the common law tradition of a 'jury by one's peers'.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
to say that you're prejudiced against all races.
What's important is to not look at only the immediate effects, but also the total effects.
If you feel your liberty is being violated by being conscripted for jury 'duty' you might stay home.
If that happens you'll have a warrant put out for your arrest. If you feel that arrest would also violate your liberty, you might resist that arrest, perhaps with force in self-defense. If you're successful in doing so, you'll either immediately or eventually be shot, likely fatally, having your life taken as well as your liberty.
I can't quite believe that anyone who can write in full sentences can be so retarded.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Actually I would prefer a court of professional judges who
a) actually know the law
b) are accountable for misjudgements they made
That said, no trial should be held behind closed doors.
Btw. The "Trial without jury" thing is actually quite popular in europe.
I can't quite believe that anyone who can write in full sentences can be so retarded.
No, that's a strong argument! What happened, did your world view get disrupted by logic?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Sending a message or not, this is abuse of power to an extreme degree. There should be limits on judicial powers, undefined servitude is a good start to the limitations.