Jury done 2
After a day of rest, one broader thought about juries, then I'll let it go.

The 'Good Government' dummies are always lecturing us about apathy when we fail to vote. Nope, skipping the vote is perfectly rational because voting is absolutely meaningless. Candidates are identical, and referenda that could create real change are instantly overruled by Federal black-robed Satans.

But participating on a jury is still marginally meaningful and occasionally earth-shaking.

Juries are the ONLY way that an ordinary citizen can shape the behavior of the government; and the voice of each ordinary citizen on a jury is significant. One contrarian can eliminate a decision.

You can see the occasional earthquakes in the recent grand juries who CORRECTLY and COURAGEOUSLY absolved cops for defending themselves. But those quakes are short-lived. Those decisions will be quickly deleted by the Federal black-robed Satans because the thug was Vibrant. Laws do not apply to Vibrants.

A longer-lasting earthquake happened in Spokane several months ago when a jury CORRECTLY absolved a citizen for defending himself. Those jurors effectively changed the law itself. Existing state law said self-defense was only permitted when your life is clearly in danger. Those citizens decided that self-defense is permitted when a crime has just been committed against you. Because both citizen and thug were white, the Federal black-robed Satans weren't interested, so the decision was allowed to stand.

The case that I served on was absolutely non-seismic. Just a spoiled bad dude who thought he could get away with bad shit in a foreign country with a looser culture. No sharia law here, so anything goes, right? Wrong, dude. Natural law is natural law whether you call it sharia or not. This jury helped to maintain natural law, and our decision was in the spirit of sharia. We didn't build any new walls to hold back chaos, but at least we prevented the defense attorney from drilling a new cultural-exception hole in the existing wall. A different set of 12 citizens might have allowed the hole. Because courts listen to precedent, one hole can eventually breach a dam.


Before this experience I didn't appreciate the power of one citizen to shape the law. Now that I've been in the middle of it, I do.

= = = = =

Tacking on an observation about demographics. Writing about my 2006 jury call, which didn't lead to actual selection, I noted that the TV stereotype of jurors as "welfare queens" is completely untrue here. The people who respond to the summons are largely middle or upper-middle types. Roughly 70% of the people who get a summons don't bother to show up at all, and there's no punishment for them. So what makes the responders respond? Some are just naturally dutiful, incapable of disobeying, but the motive for others must be a love of community and civilization. You can see this love in action in cases that settle during jury selection. Young punk thinks he can fool the squares, but after he looks in the eyes of 100 squares, he realizes the squares HATE HIM and aren't going to be fooled. He pleads.

Result: In a jury trial, jurors AND defendants AND plaintiffs are mainly above median in income and status. A poor defendant in a criminal case will almost always plead out either before or during the trial process. Defendants bet against a jury only when they can afford a good attorney. Similarly with civil cases. Small claims run through small claims court, not through the jury system. Larger suits nearly always settle before trial. Only a rich plaintiff who is suing a rich defendant will bet on a full trial.

= = = = =

More detailed thought about TV.... I've often noted that the people who appear on TV bear no resemblance to anyone I've ever met or known in real life. Previously I attributed this to geography: TV people are New Yorkers and I've only known humans. After this jury thing I'll have to discard that hypothesis. Aside from myself, all 11 people in that jury were strictly As Seen On TV except for race. Every made-for-TV movie about a jury would include every one of these characters, but the TV version would be 70% black and 70% Hispanic and 70% Jewish because as everyone knows those are the real proportions in every city in America. The foreman isn't just As Seen On TV; he's Actually Seen On TV. He's a local semi-celebrity and motivational speaker who is accustomed to the camera. (I hadn't heard of him, but apparently everyone else knows who he is.)

I have to conclude that the TV-vs-real distinction is mainly class, not geography. Those 11 people are upper-middle types who live a 'large' life in a large suburban property. I'm the exception because I'm working class, living a 'narrow' life in a tiny house. I wouldn't have been in the movie.

Labels: Natural law = Sharia law

  ¶ 4:16 AM