Government Got Me!!!!

[NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer]

So I guess I have built up some pretty negative karma by mentioning how much I hate the US government's laws over and over online. Well they got me back today. I got a summons for jury duty!! This is going to SUCK! I'm going to have to be at court every day at 8:30am, and no more wake and bake!!!! Wish me luck guys, hopefully I am not selected as one of the jurors when I go to the initial hearing.

 

[TURKEYNECK]

better you than me

 

[SPEARCHUCKER]

Good grief. Actually had me worried about you there for a second.

You Florida State boys need to toughen up. Last time the government got me I ended up in a jungle smokin hash with some Asians for 2 years.

 

[Jibber]

If your trying to get out of it, just come across as a racist/biased person when they interview you. I heard that works.

Good luck.

 

[NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer]

better you than me

I'm going to remember that one Turkey....

 

[The Effen Gee]

That's what happens when you pay your taxes.

...and stay under the radar....

 

[lordhighlama]

At least your not the reason the jury is being summoned!

 

[SherwoodForest]

I like jury duty, I've met some great people going to jury duty. Plus it's money in your pocket, and you might get on an interesting and important case. It's a bummer that stoners and growers always want to get out of doing their duty because what happens is the "jury of your peers" becomes a jury full of old timers that will send you up the river for growing a single plant. Pro legalization advocates need to get in the courts and show this country that they are willing to fight for the freedom of those that deserve it. That's how laws get changed and growers get let free. Consider how you might feel if you are in court charged with cultivation, and instead of some like minded folks in the jury, it's all ex cops and school marms.

 

[ArtVandolay]

You need to bake some brownies for lunch .

 

[NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer]

I like jury duty, I've met some great people going to jury duty. Plus it's money in your pocket, and you might get on an interesting and important case. It's a bummer that stoners and growers always want to get out of doing their duty because what happens is the "jury of your peers" becomes a jury full of old timers that will send you up the river for growing a single plant. Pro legalization advocates need to get in the courts and show this country that they are willing to fight for the freedom of those that deserve it. That's how laws get changed and growers get let free. Consider how you might feel if you are in court charged with cultivation, and instead of some like minded folks in the jury, it's all ex cops and school marms.

Are there very many jury cases for cultivation? I didn't think they were.

 

[umbra]

just dont reach in your pocket and have a bag of weed fall out on the floor in front of the judge. lol

 

[Alistair]

I always respond to the jury summons letter with a letter explaining why I can't afford to do jury duty. I can't be on a jury, because I want to assume the person on the stand is innocent and I'd rather see him go free. I believe it's better for 99 guilty men to go free than to put one innocent man in prison. If I explained that to the lawyers during jury selection, they'd never choose me anyway. But that's how I feel, especially when it come to drug related charges.

Not only that, I'm a contrary, if the other 11 jurors say guilty, I say innocent. I think differently than a lot of people on several different issues. I'm not sure that they'd want me on their jury.

 

[yimmy capone]

I just give them my criminal record. That always gets me off.

 

[winstonwolf]

If your trying to get out of it, just come across as a racist/biased person when they interview you. I heard that works.

Good luck.

Depends on which county you're in. There are places here where that would make you more desirable, not less.

 

[PencilHead]

Jeez, I just realized I had written you a whole serious paragraph on how to avoid jury duty. What a suspiciously sorry American I am. Had to delete it. Take something to read, act supirior.

Good luck--they never choose me. Could be the tin-foil hat Art loaned me. You wear it just barely peeking out from under a football helmet, next thing you know they're buying you candy bars outta the vending machine, asking do you need a ride home.

 

[JBonez]

i would make it the biggest pain in the arse for everyone involved in the court process until they either let me go home, or made me stay, if they make me stay, Innocent all the way! unless its for a real crime and the evidence is compounding.

 

[Daiwa13]

I never respond to the letters, have got 3 or 4 over time, and just rip them up. I am on disability, so that's my excuse if they ever contact me with a penalty, I will say I am mentally unstable and did not understand the letters.

 

[PencilHead]

If you indeed do have a valid excuse, play it--you ain't gonna save the universe by doing J-doody. Like I said: take a good book you won't mind them finding you reading when you died cause it could take that long. I was on jury doody so long once, I had to ask for the address in case I needed get my SS checks forwarded there when the time came.

 

[SherwoodForest]

So what valid reasons can anyone here give for not doing it? One guy said something about not being able to get high all day, and one guy is dissabled. I would hope selfishness isn't a driving factor behind MP's members not wanting to get involved.

 

[ArtVandolay]

I always respond to the jury summons letter with a letter explaining why I can't afford to do jury duty. I can't be on a jury, because I want to assume the person on the stand is innocent and I'd rather see him go free. I believe it's better for 99 guilty men to go free than to put one innocent man in prison. If I explained that to the lawyers during jury selection, they'd never choose me anyway. But that's how I feel, especially when it come to drug related charges.

Not only that, I'm a contrary, if the other 11 jurors say guilty, I say innocent. I think differently than a lot of people on several different issues. I'm not sure that they'd want me on their jury.

In any jury trial, there are 3 possible outcomes:

- the guilty person is convicted/innocent person is acquitted (mutually exclusive). Each (depending on the situation), the "correct" decision;
- a guilty person is acquitted (this is a Type II statistical error);
- an innocent person is convicted (a Type I statistical error). Note also that the guilty person is still free in this case;

Most Americans (just like Alister ) find type II errors disturbing but not as bad as type I errors (better that a guilty person goes free than an innocent person to be convicted). It would be nice to completely eliminate both error types but it can't be done. In fact, reducing one causes the other to become higher. This happens because the appearance of guilt and innocence are not clear cut. Innocent people can appear to be guilty and guilty people appear to be innocent.

Nevertheless, our jury system is tilted toward the avoidance of Type I errors (convicting an innocent person) through the requirement that the jury verdict be unanimous.

You don't want to know why I know this stuff .