Jury duty and journalism
Jury duty in High Point today. A lawyer friend offered to get me out of it, but I turned him down. It's my civic duty. Everyone seems to think that my craft will keep me from actually being put on a jury. Best I can tell, though, that is a myth.
Yesterday's New York Times describes the experience of a Washington Post reporter called to serve on the Lewis Libby jury. She said she didn't trust VP Cheney.
If that wasn't enough to disqualify her, she also said that she was not sure that she could resist yakking about the trial to her colleagues at The Post or to her boyfriend, who is also a Post reporter. "I'm a gossip," she said. Judge Walton dismissed her.
What journalist isn't a gossip? I just hope I get a good case.
Update: I was selected for a jury. (I can't talk about it.) My wife says this means the court system of the State of North Carolina has decreed that I can analyse and evaluate information, and render a decision impartially and without bias. I appreciate that endorsement.
Comments (9)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I get called every two or three years like clockwork, usually in April. Don't know why, unless it's cosmic payback for having a last name that starts with "A" and getting to spend so much time in the front of the line in grade school.
Several years ago I was the last juror in the voir dire pool except for one, who became the last alternate seated in a capital case. Nice to have the cup pass by on that one.
The only case where I've ever actually sat on a jury was a civil case. (Fun fact: City Council member Mike Barber, in his pre-political days, was representing one of the parties.) I couldn't have gossiped about it if I'd wanted to; neither I nor, it turns out, any other juror had the slightest idea what the case was about, even after four days of testimony. The case was settled at that point, whereupon we jurors looked at one another, shrugged and said, "Uh ... OK."
They also serve who only sit and are confused.
Posted on January 23, 2007 8:27 AM
Jeez, I hope it isn't a case involving an innocent, upstanding conservative falsely accused of clubbing baby seals and throwing the carcasses from his Hummer at Truth and Reconciliation activists. That guy would be toast.
Posted on January 24, 2007 12:50 AM
brian444,
I just about fell out of my chair laughing at that one. And, of course, if the baby seal just happened to be black the reporting would be front page bold face type with a racial insinuation.
John, sorry to take up your blog space with a comment to brian444.
By the way, why would you refuse to be interviewed by Jerry Bledsoe? Normally, as one is being pummeled one would enjoy the opportunity to defend.
Posted on January 24, 2007 2:04 AM
Obviously, Brian, the court knows a fair, level-headed juror when it sees one.
Tony, I agreed to be interviewed by Jerry through an e-mail exchange because I wanted to have a written record. Jerry balked, made some snide comments about me and then what I considered some unfair demands. After that I felt he was going to deal with us as he always has, grinding that ax. When I asked for assurance that he treat my responses fairly, he wasn't able to give it, at least in a way that I believed him. So I said, never mind.
Perhaps I should post the whole exchange on the blog, now that you mention it.
Posted on January 24, 2007 7:16 AM
If they ever catch me, I'd be happy for you to serve on my jury.
Posted on January 24, 2007 2:15 PM
I'm sure a lot of people would be interested in any e-mail exchange between you and Jerry Bledsoe.
Posted on January 24, 2007 5:04 PM
I would be most interested in seeing any email exchanges between you & Jerry Bledsoe.
Posted on January 26, 2007 5:50 PM
John,
Have you made a decision as to whether or not you are going to share your e-mail exchanges with Jerry Bledsoe? It's 4 days since you mentioned doing so.
And since you still allow Ahearn to describe the police department as "racked with scandal" perhaps you can describe any "scandal" that is fact pertaining to the Greensboro Police Department.
Posted on January 28, 2007 12:26 PM
I just haven't gotten to it, yet, Tony. Honestly, it's not all that high on my agenda. As to the scandal, you don't think an RMA investigation, an SBI investigation, an inability to hire a chief and the frozen movement within the ranks qualifies?
Posted on January 28, 2007 5:27 PM