|
Post by fourthousandholes on Apr 24, 2007 20:27:49 GMT -5
Just a note to everyone that I'm on jury duty this week, and the case is so intense that when I get home every day I'm too burned out to spend much time here. I'll be back soon, but just so you know, I haven't abandoned the board. Best wishes to you all.
|
|
|
Post by Mellow Yellow on Apr 24, 2007 21:47:11 GMT -5
Objection!
|
|
|
Post by fourthousandholes on Apr 25, 2007 6:46:24 GMT -5
Sustained!
|
|
|
Post by That Latvian Guy on Apr 25, 2007 10:10:39 GMT -5
High-sticking!
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Apr 25, 2007 14:34:40 GMT -5
If the lawyer at the defense table is this guy: Then don't expect a final summation, the case will be solved long before then. ;D Hey, I sometimes wondered.. are they saying if you want to win, get a "Mason"?
|
|
|
Post by fourthousandholes on Apr 26, 2007 18:55:37 GMT -5
It's almost been that good. Atticus Finch has nothing on these guys I'm hearing from. The problem now is that no matter which side wins, I'll feel like a heel for not supporting the loosing side. Hmmm. That didn't come out right. What I mean is that both sides have a great case, and I hate to see either one lose!
|
|
|
Post by mommybird on Apr 27, 2007 10:58:52 GMT -5
Good luck with the jury duty, 4000.
|
|
|
Post by fourthousandholes on Apr 27, 2007 19:57:36 GMT -5
Thank you. (God knows we'll need it!)
|
|
|
Post by fourthousandholes on Apr 30, 2007 14:34:15 GMT -5
Well it's over. The verdict is in. The right verdict for all the wrong reasons. If anyone's interested, I can elaborate. But if this experience was any indicator, my advise to y'all would be never go to court expecting justice. The fact that, in this instance, the outcome was about right was plain ol' dumb luck. Many of the jurors were obsessed with getting back to their jobs, not a nice lawyerly parsing of what was just for the plaintiffs or the defendants. Oh sure, they cared, but only if the issues could be resolved as quickly as possible. As for the trial itself, many of the "experts" were utterly preposterous, blinded in their own self-worth, and as for the plaintiffs and defendants, they all probably deserved to go to jail, from what I could see. But what was most difficult about the whole thing was that the case was a centered on a terrible tragedy. I wept hearing the testimony, and then turned right around and joined everyone in rendering a savagely cold-blooded verdict. Perhaps someone here could spare a little Bailey's. I think I be needing a spot of it. But for better or for worse, I'm back!Don't everyone cheer at once.
|
|
|
Post by That Latvian Guy on Apr 30, 2007 14:42:45 GMT -5
Perhaps someone here could spare a little Bailey's. I think I be needing a spot of it. I have some Johnnie Walker. Should I mail it?
|
|
|
Post by fourthousandholes on Apr 30, 2007 14:46:05 GMT -5
That'll do nicely! ;D
|
|
|
Post by That Latvian Guy on Apr 30, 2007 14:48:10 GMT -5
What's your e-mail address? ;D
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Apr 30, 2007 17:08:04 GMT -5
I'd like to hear more, absolutely. If it would save some effort on your part, is there a link to a news story we could read?
|
|
|
Post by fourthousandholes on May 1, 2007 10:50:40 GMT -5
The case centered on a very young lady with difficulties, so to spare her embarassment, almost nothing was in the papers, even though there was a lot of emotional testimony, and angry lawyers "debunking" each other's witnesses. Had this situation been a little bit different, it probably would have made the papers.
|
|
|
Post by mommybird on May 1, 2007 12:01:21 GMT -5
For the most part, jury duty is a joke !
|
|
|
Post by LOVELYRITA on May 4, 2007 20:50:16 GMT -5
In the case of my local county courthouse, if I get jury duty, I'll write a letter telling them the fact I know that one of their judges doctored transcripts in a custody case and another is part of a ring of putting kids in the home of the wrong parent, putting them on drugs, placing them in "facilities", calling the kids "troubled" and getting kickbacks under the table.
I can't be on a jury trying a criminal, when the judge presiding over the case is more corrupt than the criminal being tried.
Protesting in front of the courthouse would not an unbiased juror be.
|
|
|
Post by beatlies on May 4, 2007 21:07:32 GMT -5
In the case of my local county courthouse, if I get jury duty, I'll write a letter telling them the fact I know that one of their judges doctored transcripts in a custody case and another is part of a ring of putting kids in the home of the wrong parent, putting them on drugs, placing them in "facilities", calling the kids "troubled" and getting kickbacks under the table. I can't be on a jury trying a criminal, when the judge presiding over the case is more corrupt than the criminal being tried. Protesting in front of the courthouse would not an unbiased juror be. Start talking about the replacement of JPM and Faul with them.
|
|