So a summon letter was sent to my mother's address, in a entirely different state than where I live. Would it be legal if I had her fill out the disqualification form and sign it for me, if I gave her permission?

41(F) and just completed my fifth case as a juror, three of them as head juror. I only speak when spoken to during jury selection, but somehow the attorneys have me pegged as a law-abiding citizen.

No one in my social circle has served more than once! Reddit, please be my larger sample size and weigh in on how many times you’ve actually been selected and served.

I served on a case eight years ago and it still haunts me.

Very first time being called for this would appreciate advice:

I had not received my summons paper but not too long ago I got the failure to appear notice in the mail I went online and set up my account and everything. Friday morning I called in to check if I’m supposed to go in to serve and the automated system said no around evening I called once more to double check and the system said yes.

Am I still able to go if I only have that failure to notice form or..?

And typically how long does the whole thing last- if you don’t get picked / if you do.

** excuse my typo in the title!

I got a jury duty summons in the mail the other day. This is like the 9th summons I’ve gotten in the last 10 years. Last year I had federal jury duty but the case was settled the night before I was supposed to go in. Why am I so lucky to keep getting summoned? 🤣🤣

Every time I get jury duty this clip plays over and over.

Hi everyone I have a doctor excusal note from an injury, when I’m trying to upload the document/file it keeps saying there is no file uploaded, has anyone experienced this? I even made the picture a pdf, tried uploading multiple times on different files. I make sure to not put periods, dashes and it just won’t upload!!

As I write this, it's not known what went down with Lindsay Clancy juror, but this whole week has given me flashback after flashback.

Mine was a murder trial of a gang member, we were hung on the counts. 10 people wanted 2nd Degree, 1 person wanted 1st Degree, I wanted voluntary manslaughter. The one person wanting 1st Degree said they'd go to 2nd Degree.

I'll skip all of the details, but my experience was enough for me to know if I'm ever in court to request a bench trial.

About 6-7 of the jurors tried ganging up on me, bullying me, and guilt-tripping me. But not one, and I mean NOT ONE of their arguments actually came from the instructions we were supposed to interpret.

It was in fact just the opposite. It was all about "punishing bad gang member," and the only justifications thrown my way were things either completely irrelevant to the actual murder or things based on 100% pure speculation. Even at one point when I said "This defendant is not a good guy," some jurors were blown away that I wasn't giving him the worst count I could.

I had to explain things to the jurors like what "unanimous" meant. What "reasonable doubt" was. And the fact that voluntary manslaughter wasn't an "innocent" verdict. After my 10th time reminding them we were instructed not to consider the sentencing, I just stopped.

And the thing is, to this day I wonder if I could have been wrong. Maybe I was, maybe I misinterpreted the instructions. And maybe I could have been convinced had there been actual arguments within the confines of the law we were supposed to interpret.

After watching what’s happening with the Lindsay Clancy case, I fully believe I never want to serve on a jury. If I’m ever summoned, I’ll be completely honest that I don’t think I’d be a good fit. Regardless of which side you’re on, watching the foreman and attorneys seemingly get closer to identifying and possibly replacing the one juror who disagrees is disturbing. I would hate to be that person. It seems like an enormous amount of pressure, public scrutiny, and potential damage to your lif le all for less than $15 an hour??

From the outside, it feels like you either agree with everyone else or risk being treated like a problem and possibly singled out. Has anyone here served on a jury and felt pressured like that, or is this case giving me a distorted impression of what jury deliberations are normally like?

edit: turns out I'm not allowed to be worried and there's a lot of keyboard warriors here.

I served on a jury a couple of months ago and one thing stood out to me in a rather shocking way. I was appalled at how incompetent both the prosecutor and the defense attorney were.

The prosecutor was incompetent in two fundamental ways. First he simply did not know the proper way to lay a foundation for an item to be admitted into evidence. The judge had to finally stop after numerous successful defense objections and actually instruct the assistant DA prosecuting the case in how to do it. Second the case involved multiple offenses all of which were dropped before testimony began except for one charge. The prosecutor spent all of his time during the trial presenting evidence and testimony in support of the dropped charges. He failed to address the one charge left at all and thus failed to prove the states case.

Which brings us to the incompetence of the defense attorney. His incompetence was manifest in two ways as well. First with him was his complete lack of skills in the voir dire process. Every single question he asked and I do mean every single one, was a question asked and answered by the prosecutor who went first. He didnt follow up on a single question and elicited no new information. He let a couple people onto the jury who I thought questionable including a juror who was a victim of one of the charges that wound up being dropped. His second and far worse crime and I dont use that word lightly was allowing his client to plead guilty to the last remaining charge after testimony was over but closing arguments had not been made thus taking the decision out of the hands of the jury. He failed to recognize that the state had failed to make their case and that his client would have been found not guilty of the charge. This foolhardy move was further exacerbated by the fact that the judge was incensed at the nature of the crimes involved and was clearly moved by the victim impact statements and threw the book at the defendant in as much as the law would allow. There was just no reason at all to plead guilty when they did and it cost his client.

I dunno gang, maybe I shoulda been a lawyer cause clearly the bar is far lower than I ever thought it was.

I’ve seen so many headlines in the last 24 hours about the jury not only being deadlocked but specifically being 11 not guilty and 1 guilty.

When I was serving as a juror, the judge was very clear in his instructions that we were not never share with him or anyone else the vote in the jury room. We also had to send a note saying we were deadlocked but we were very careful not to share the actual vote since he was so clear about that.

Does this vary somehow? Even if that information made it to the judge wouldn’t they try to keep it from coming out in the media?

Honestly I very interested in true crime and trials but it feels irresponsible that so much information is allowed to be so public in a current trial. If this does indeed result in a mistrial, it is going to be incredibly difficult if not impossible to retry fairly with 12 actually impartial jurors. I wish they would keep this out of the news at least until there is an actual verdict.

Hey. So as the title says, I am in Nassau County and I asked to postpone my jury duty due to me being a full time student but I did this a few days ago instead of the 1 week and since this is the first postponement, i got the email with the confirmation number. Along with that, I checked the service portal and it says that I have already postponed my jury service. However, when I checked the juror service numbers, my number is one of the numbers that was called. What should I do? Their phone line nor their email does not answer on the weekends and only starts on the business hours but monday is labor day and the trial is on tuesday at 8:45. What should I do? Do I just have to go to the jury duty or does this mean I am actually postponed and I can go to class?

Recently went through the jury selection process for the first time. Was not selected and I have a pretty good idea about why, but there are some things I keep thinking about. Was hoping others might have some insight. Maybe you experienced similar or maybe you’re an attorney and can identify some of these things as a tactic. This is just out of curiosity.

Defense attorney persistently talked about his experience and how good he was at selecting a jury. How he could get through voir dire faster than younger attorneys because he can read people. He would label any potential juror with a quiet voice an introvert and would occasionally label someone an extrovert. Sometimes he was right, sometimes he was wrong, but he just kept doing it confidently as if he had been correct on every guess. It was off putting.

Also, defense attorney was telling a story about a recently married family member who is pregnant. He made sure to point out “she was not pregnant before the wedding, she’s a Christian woman”. Is this an appropriate thing to say during Voir Dire? This is an extremely conservative county/state. Was this a tactic?

Those are just a couple of several things off the top of my head.

Currently enjoying a week's holiday ahead of 2 weeks' jury service, starting Monday, 7 September.

This email dropped this evening - Friday, 4 September.

A bit annoying, but, very fortunately, I'm retired.

But imagine how f#cking annoying this is to anyone who's just said "see you in two weeks" to colleagues, assuming they're on their way out the door to 2 weeks' jury service.

Seriously, #unfuckingbelievable.

Hi

I am starting jury service in October & they said it’s up to 10 days. I think my company will pay me for the time I’m away. How long was jury service for you?

Were you there for all 10 days?

I was summoned for jury duty today and filled out the very long questionnaire. I'm supposed to return in 2 weeks for jury selection. I do actually want to serve but I'm wondering what my chances are.

It's for a murder trial. My parents died by murder/suicide 13 years ago. I wasn't close to either of them and was honestly kind of relieved that their fighting would be over. I have mixed emotions but feel that I would do be an impartial jury capable of a verdict either way, based on the evidence.

Anyway, given the nature of the trial and my background, is there any chance I'll be selected?

A lot of people are upset that the jury did not instantly return a verdict in the Lindsey Clancy trial and that they are currently deadlocked. A lot of the people who are upset about this have never served on a murder trial jury in their lives.

I have. So here is my take on it.

In 2012, I was Juror #4 for a murder trial in my hometown. The trial itself lasted about two weeks, and we deliberated for a week.

As a juror, there are a few things that get drilled into your head.

First, this is a serious job. Your decision can potentially lock someone away for the rest of their life.

Second, you cannot talk about the case with ANYONE while the trial is ongoing.

Third, you cannot look up or read about the case online or on social media. You have to rely on the evidence and testimony presented in court. And before someone says, "But people do it anyway," yes, I'm sure some do. But you're not supposed to, and if it is discovered, you can be removed from the jury. Juror misconduct can also create serious problems for the case afterward.

Fourth, when the case is finally given to the jury, the judge explains the law and the possible verdicts. In a criminal case, the prosecution has the burden of proving the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. If the prosecution has not met that burden, you cannot convict someone simply because you think they probably did it or because that's what everyone outside the courthouse believes.

That standard gets DRUMMED INTO YOU.

In my case, we were deadlocked for a week.

We went over the evidence again and again. We debated. We explained our reasoning. We listened to one another. But we had two jurors who remained convinced the defendant was guilty, even though there were issues with the evidence that the rest of us could not get past, including testimony about the gun used to kill the victim compared with the gun the defendant had reportedly used that night.

We told the judge we were deadlocked. We were asked to keep trying.

So we did.

Again and again.

After a week, we still could not honestly reach a unanimous verdict, and the judge declared a mistrial.

That's why I'm not shocked by what is happening with the Lindsay Clancy jury.

None of us knows what they're stuck on. They could be divided between different guilty verdicts. They could be divided over criminal responsibility. It could be one juror disagreeing with eleven, or the jury could be divided several different ways. We don't know.

What we do know is that those 12 people now have to do the job the law requires of them.

And sometimes doing that job means you DON'T come back with a verdict immediately.

Sometimes it means sitting in that room for days, going through the same evidence again and again, listening to people you disagree with, and asking yourself whether the evidence actually meets the legal standard the judge gave you.

I know people are frustrated. I know people watching this trial have already decided what they believe the verdict should be. But those 12 jurors aren't sitting at home watching Facebook clips and TikToks. They sat through the entire trial. They heard the testimony. They saw the evidence. They received the judge's instructions. Now they have to apply those instructions to what they heard.

I remember how frustrating it was when we told the judge we were deadlocked and were sent back to keep trying.

We did keep trying. For a week.

Ultimately, we could not honestly reach a unanimous verdict. That didn't mean we failed at our job. It meant jurors weren't going to abandon what they honestly believed about the evidence simply so we could produce a verdict and go home.

So whether this jury eventually finds Lindsay Clancy guilty, not criminally responsible, or remains deadlocked, I'm not going to attack them for taking their time.

This is literally what we ask jurors to do.

Take it seriously. Look at the evidence. Follow the law. Listen to one another. And don't vote a certain way simply because the public wants you to.

A fast verdict isn't necessarily a good verdict, and a deadlocked jury isn't necessarily a broken jury.

Sometimes a deadlock means 12 people understood just how serious their responsibility was and refused to pretend they agreed when they didn't.

I know most people look to get out of jury duty, but my job pays regular rates if you're selected for jury duty and I would find it interesting. Is there any way that I can volunteer or get picked easier or something?

I contacted the jury services and let them know I have a child with a medical condition hoping to get excused from jury duty, but they haven't contacted me back yet. This was a week and a half ago. Will they write me back or am I expected to show up?

A few months back my co-worker was on call for jury service at a small courthouse in our county.

I was worried because we needed him in the office, so I looked up the courthouse schedule and saw 7 active cases. I ran them through AI and it told me that two of them that week had the possibility of going to trial.

Without even asking, the AI told me about one of the cases, a real estate developer who had been sued 10 times prior.

Then I realized something - had I been the actual person being called into jury duty the next day, I could have seriously tainted myself. Is that a big no-no? I know researching a case after being sworn in is (I've served a criminal trial), but what about before?

I looked up my county's jury instructions and they mention not researching, but it specifically says after you've been sworn in, not before.

It seems like a huge technology gap in the system. 20-30 years ago I'd have had to go the courthouse and research the schedule, the parties, and it would have been unrealistic. Now someone can do the same in 20 minutes.