Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

calmatters.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 169 posts

Re: California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

#41

Post by Cougher »

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 wrote: post #3

I’m normally automatically skeptical of anything passed by our legislature here (which passes laws to ban plastic straws and water in restaurants but couldn’t care less about feces and mental illness all over the streets). For this, I’m totally 100% behind the decision. A jury of our peers is as good as it gets, folks. Even with the drawbacks it will never get better. We need to protect it and honor it, and that incl…

"A jury of our peers is as good as it gets, folks. Even with the drawbacks it will never get better."

I'm never understood such blind chauvinism, particularly here in light of all that's been said in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21710564

Re: California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

#43

Post by Teknoman117 »

mtnGoat wrote: post #42

As they should be! If someone pays their debt to society all their rights should be restored. (Gun rights being the acception, in certain cases, IMHO).

I mean I don't like the idea of people who committed a violent crime having legal access to firearms either, but if we truly believed our "justice" system reformed people, why would they need to have their rights restricted following their release?

I mean I know our justice system is busted and you'd have to be insane to say it actually reformed people instead of just locking them away because we don't give a shit about doing anything else, but either way...

Re: California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

#44

Post by nindalf »

larnmar wrote: post #13
gesman wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Add to that idiotic idea to ban water bottles in SFO to "protect the environment". Now every thirsty passenger in SFO has to either buy a gigantic 1.5L water bottle or of a questionable health-quality aluminum one. Sorry for diversion of a subject, can't resist.

Luckily someone invented La Croix so you can just drink your water fizzy, lightly flavoured, and in a super-wasteful tiny can.

Actually, that's pronounced La Croix.

Re: California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

#45

Post by inferiorhuman »

gnicholas wrote: post #19

I've served on a jury in CA and have seen jury selection on a couple occasions. Based on what I've seen, I think it will remain highly unlikely that a convicted felon will make their way onto a jury of a criminal trial (civil trials might be more likely). In the standard questionnaire that prospective jurors are given, they are asked if they or members of their immediate family have been victims of a crime, or if the…

In my experience, judges will themselves excuse jurors who have family in law enforcement (parent, spouse, sibling), which means the lawyers don't have to bother using a challenge on it. I would expect the same will happen with many/most criminal convictions, especially when they are related to the crime that is alleged.

That's not been my experience, and I've sat through the process in San Francisco 3-4 times so far.

note: my experience is in San Mateo county jury selection as a private citizen. I am also a former lawyer, and almost all of my lawyer friends have never made it past jury selection. I served once, only because I emphasized that I practiced tax law, which is very different from criminal law.

Yep, voir dire is designed to weed out anyone with knowledge of the legal system or knowledge relevant to the case at hand. Then those people are expected to make decisions based on legal standards they've no familiarity with.

It's the best system in the world.

Re: California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

#46

Post by pell »

jedberg wrote: post #25
gnicholas wrote: post #19

I've served on a jury in CA and have seen jury selection on a couple occasions. Based on what I've seen, I think it will remain highly unlikely that a convicted felon will make their way onto a jury of a criminal trial (civil trials might be more likely). In the standard questionnaire that prospective jurors are given, they are asked if they or members of their immediate family have been victims of a crime, or if the…

I think it's kind of random. Last time I was on jury selection, the defendant, a black man, was accused of robbing a bank at gunpoint. The woman being questioned for jury duty was asked about being a victim of crime. She said, "I've been a bank teller for over 20 years. I've been robbed at gunpoint three times, and every time it was a black man. Black men are always guilty". I was shocked she would say such a thing,…

The jury system seems completely corrupt to me. I am glad we do not use this method in criminal trials here in Germany where I live.

Re: California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

#47

Post by Florin_Andrei »

elchief wrote: post #39

If you served your time, you served your time. If not, shoulda got more time

> If you served your time, you served your time.

Seriously, so much this. The thing should be stateless. You made a mistake, there were consequences - but once that's over, you ought to be good as new.

Eternal punishment only ought to have a place in dumb mythology.

Re: California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

#48

Post by pastage »

wahern wrote: post #30
jimbob45 wrote: post #20

Why is anyone ever barred from jury duty outside of severe disability? Voir dire seems to exist to mitigate any conceivable juror issues.

Once upon a time jury duty was considered a privilege, a way for upstanding citizens to shape their community. Losing that privilege was a social punishment, and a way to ensure justice was aspirational--lenient and harsh according to how the community expected itself to behave and evolve. The Magna Carta, which secured the right to a jury trial, only concerned the rights of the landed gentry. The jury trial was abou…

There is also the concept of lay judges, people who are non educated in law but are paid a small sum.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lay_judge

Re: California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

#49

Post by toredash »

Teknoman117 wrote: post #43
mtnGoat wrote: post #42

As they should be! If someone pays their debt to society all their rights should be restored. (Gun rights being the acception, in certain cases, IMHO).

I mean I don't like the idea of people who committed a violent crime having legal access to firearms either, but if we truly believed our "justice" system reformed people, why would they need to have their rights restricted following their release? I mean I know our justice system is busted and you'd have to be insane to say it actually reformed people instead of just locking them away because we don't give a shit ab…

Would you say the same thing if a former convict of child abuse wanted to work closely with your kinds in school, sports or other arenas? I for sure would not be happy with it.

Certain things are not a right to have, e.g. driving license or be working in a specific profession. Firearms in the US is special but the use of firearm in the US is a topic for itself.

Re: California is about to allow former felons to serve on juries

#50

Post by tombrossman »

ISL wrote: post #29
tobyhinloopen wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was he guilty?

That is the wrong question -- if a juror is that certain, pre-trial, that a defendant is guilty, there is no way that the defendant can get a fair trial.

> if a juror is that certain, pre-trial, that a defendant is guilty, there is no way that the defendant can get a fair trial

Sure they can, one nutjob juror cannot convict.

I've also been seated on juries where some of my fellow jurors were quite obviously biased against the defendant, and this really hurt their credibility with me. I wasn't the only one either, other jurors challenged some of the statements they made and it was clear to me that they also picked up on the bias and rejected it.

My first time on a jury a pleasant looking retired white man said he wanted to be foreman, for a trial of a Hispanic youth, and the guy started with "well he's obviously guilty right?" and he was serious. This was met with total outrage from several others on the jury and the foreman sat there meekly for the rest of the deliberations. The rest of us carefully reviewed the evidence and the defendant absolutely received a fair trial.

Post reply on HN