Subnostr

That's correct. The opposing lawyers pick the jurors, but they're selected at random initially.

A Summons is mailed out to 300 people, for example, to report for Jury Duty on a specific date. Prior to them attending, they check a website or call a number to see if the number on their Summons got picked. If so they must attend. They then show up, check in, and then wait, sometimes for hours, before being called to move to another room. Some don't even get called at all but they have to wait there anyway. Those who were moved to the other room, get questioned or interviewed. Then the lawyers select who they want for the proceedings.

sms 1y ago

OK, so what he says is true.

How then, can the natural opposition to being on a jury be addressed through insurance policies?

I mean to the point that people can volunteer to be on a jury with alacrity, because they know they won't suffer financial losses in the unlikely case they are selected.

Currently, the incentives seem constructed to make their jury system irrelevant: the judge and lawyers shape the outcome of the trial however they wish, as he explains in the Trial by Jury podcast series.

Spooner - writing 170 years ago - confirms that's been the case practically since the beginning of their gangsterment.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

JoeBoonie 1y ago

I'll look it up, but as far as I know ... there aren't any incentives about Jury Duty, unless it's JURY NULLIFICATION. 🙂

sms 1y ago

Yes, that's not an incentive, because they don't get any immediate personal benefit, but do suffer immediate personal financial losses from a rather unlikely event of being on a jury!

That kind of outcome seems perfectly suited for insurance policy riders, or whatever that's called in your territories.🤔

JoeBoonie 1y ago

I think what you're looking for doesn't exist, unfortunately.

sms 1y ago

Why wouldn't the insurance underwriters offer such as a rider or even separate group policy?

JoeBoonie 1y ago

I'm not convinced that there is an insurance policy in relation to the financial losses of jury duty. The question comes up how to underwrite such a risk, how would it be priced, and what type of documentation can be supported to an insurance carrier of the financial loss? This is not a common exposure but you raise a valid point. I am intrigued.

sms 1y ago

Well, the victim would present whatever his proof of income was for some recent preceeding period. Subtract from that whatever the gangsterment pays them for jury duty: that's the loss.

What do you think your underwriter would say, if you said, "I have an idea for a rider to market to political organisation members, such as #Libertarian Party, #GOP, #AARP, et cetera..."?🤔

JoeBoonie 1y ago

It's not up to one underwriter for such a product. It would have to come from an insurer who's done the heavy lifting with their actuary of assessing the exposure. You present a very interesting concept.

sms 1y ago

Another marketing channel might be sending an ad to those chosen by the clerk for that jury duty purgatory.

That must be somehow publicly known in your system and involve advanced notice of at least a few weeks, right?

So, they get an ad during that notice period that insurance is available in case of their being selected for jury.

There must be some public data in such a system regarding what the chances are of being selected, no?

Doesn't seem difficult to calculate risk, and target those affected or willing to be on juries, if they can be protected from losses.

I heard Americans suggesting to each other that claiming "financial hardship" is a good way to avoid jury duty.