rehmwa 2 #451 November 2, 2015 sure, I guess they are all the same, no need to examine the individual ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #452 November 2, 2015 Which desk are you behind? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #453 November 2, 2015 QuoteI have a hard time with questions that are "what are you", rather than "how do you think" That's the wierd thing about jury selection though isn't it? A candidate who wants on or off a jury can say anything they want about how they think and there's not a damn think you can do to show otherwise. What are they and what groups do they belong to is pretty much the only information you can have any confidence in.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #454 November 2, 2015 Nah, you just need to be smart about selecting the right people and preventing THOSE people from getting on the jury. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #455 November 2, 2015 So it's ok for hillary to defend a rapist that she knew did it because it's her job to do so, but as a prosecutor it's not ok for him to do his job and get a conviction by avoiding the selection of people statistically not likely to convict......? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #456 November 2, 2015 jakeeQuoteI have a hard time with questions that are "what are you", rather than "how do you think" That's the wierd thing about jury selection though isn't it? A candidate who wants on or off a jury can say anything they want about how they think and there's not a damn think you can do to show otherwise. What are they and what groups do they belong to is pretty much the only information you can have any confidence in. you have that right but the other two options. 1 - take 'em randomly and no selection process to ruin that - has some scary scenarios. 2 - have a more vetted (lengthy, deeper, more expensive?) pre-screen process that creates a pool of 'qualified' jurors to select from - that can be abused/biased by pre-selecting certain social orientations to fill the pool. I'm not sure if a fix is better than the original problem. But the current process is pretty sad when you have two countering intents trying to stack the deck with biases they think will help their case and hurt the other. And these biases based on personal, but studied, biases about demographics. it's pretty much the antithesis of what we should strive for - a jury of unbiased intelligent people that try their best to ignore their false prejudices and let data drive decisions. then we cap it off with closing and opening statements during trial designed to try and elicit emotional connections or reactions..... bring on the zombie apocalypse ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #457 November 2, 2015 cvfd1399So it's ok for hillary to defend a rapist that she knew did it because it's her job to do so, but as a prosecutor it's not ok for him to do his job and get a conviction by avoiding the selection of people statistically not likely to convict......? nonsense - it's ok for the prosecutor to try and pick a horribly unbalanced jury because the expectation is that the defense will do exactly the same and their efforts are hoped to cancel each other out it appeals to a very poor opinion of human nature (i'm not saying the opinion is incorrect, it's just sad) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #458 November 2, 2015 cvfd1399So it's ok for hillary to defend a rapist that she knew did it because it's her job to do so, but as a prosecutor it's not ok for him to do his job and get a conviction by avoiding the selection of people statistically not likely to convict......? No. But it is OK for Hillary to follow the law, do her job and defend someone she suspected but did not know was guilty. And it is not OK for a prosecutor to break the law (and by extension fail to do his job) and apply racial segregation to jury selection.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #459 November 2, 2015 Quote That's the wierd thing about jury selection though isn't it? A candidate who wants on or off a jury can say anything they want about how they think and there's not a damn think you can do to show otherwise. What are they and what groups do they belong to is pretty much the only information you can have any confidence in. The easiest way to get out of jury duty, just say "I think the police never arrest someone who isn't guilty" or the transverse "the cops are always messing with people and charge people for no reason" Either way your excused....One of my old crusty supervisors used to wear his uniform to report for jury duty, he'd just throw his hands up at the judge and say "what?". He was funny as hell anyway, the judge would just shake his head and excuse him. In the case of my wife, she really did want to serve. Now she knows she'll never have the chance. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 220 #460 November 2, 2015 normiss You honestly think, there is a minute, remote chance, that a wife of a cop would believe a defendant's testimony above a cop??? There must be a good reason this is practiced with regularity. Fair and balanced defense, not discrimination. I think the prosecuting side has more than enough ways to railroad people if need be. Or black. So stereotypes aren't just fictional now then, are they?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,439 #461 November 2, 2015 I know that when Ive made it to void dire, LE family members are normally excused, as are people with family members currently involved with the law for similar offenses. It was funny the time that the husband of the Houston PD chief was in the pool . He said he'd be thrilled to serve, but then said who he was. What's sorry are the dumbasses who want to get on even if ineligible (I was on a jury invalidated that way), and the ones who say whatever shit comes out of their mouth to get out (pregnant wife + starving children + broken car + busy business + I think aliens were landing that day ) Wendy P. There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #462 November 3, 2015 Sadly accurate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 220 #463 November 3, 2015 normiss Sadly accurate. Not as much pride anymore. I am happy to do my part.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #464 November 3, 2015 turtlespeed ***Sadly accurate. Not as much pride anymore. And it was when that people didn't try and skip jury duty?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 220 #465 November 3, 2015 jakee ******Sadly accurate. Not as much pride anymore. And it was when that people didn't try and skip jury duty? I truly wish we were back in the days when Kennedy said, ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #466 November 3, 2015 Interesting sometimes these days when someone actively tries to get on a jury for a newsworthy trial. Seems some want to write a book after or make twisted impacts on cases, like preventing a death conviction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #467 November 3, 2015 turtlespeed I truly wish we were back in the days when Kennedy said, ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. You mean, back in the day that Kennedy felt it neccessary to ask? Which probably means that, y'know, people weren't doing it?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #468 November 3, 2015 cvfd1399Keep using that selective memory. Incidents like I suggested you google did not happen at the severity and frequency as they do now. When I was in high school a kid in class got up, took a claw hammer out of his bag and caved the teacher's skull in. This was well before youtube. Didn't even get reported in the paper. Just because you can find more information about it, doesn't mean it is happening more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #469 November 3, 2015 With the invention of the internet and published studies it is easier to find the results which indicate what I am saying is true. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #470 November 4, 2015 Your logic is truly dizzying. I mean truly - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #471 November 4, 2015 SkyDekker***Keep using that selective memory. Incidents like I suggested you google did not happen at the severity and frequency as they do now. When I was in high school a kid in class got up, took a claw hammer out of his bag and caved the teacher's skull in. This was well before youtube. Didn't even get reported in the paper. Just because you can find more information about it, doesn't mean it is happening more. Was he inspired by this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Streleski"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #472 November 4, 2015 It was a hint for those here who doubt me to get off your lazy asses and search for the studies. They are out there and prove that students are more violent towards each other and the teachers with a pronounced disregard for authority compared to the past. If you can't understand that then Ooh well disregard my posts I don't have time for your obtuseness. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #473 November 4, 2015 If the studies are so easy to find, which don't you link a couple? If you're the one making the claim, it is on you to provide evidence. Unless you're too lazy, that is. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,190 #474 November 4, 2015 ryoder******Keep using that selective memory. Incidents like I suggested you google did not happen at the severity and frequency as they do now. When I was in high school a kid in class got up, took a claw hammer out of his bag and caved the teacher's skull in. This was well before youtube. Didn't even get reported in the paper. Just because you can find more information about it, doesn't mean it is happening more. Was he inspired by this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Streleski Probably inspired by "Maxwell Silverhammer"Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #475 November 4, 2015 Another fine officer! They should take his entire pension to cover the costs associated with his crazy plot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
