nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Jury Duty

Thelonious Monk

I just got summoned for this last week. Again. A couple of years ago I got it for the first time and showed up at the central criminal court, and lo and behold they put me on the jury for that whole Sean Fitzpatrick thing. When we came to the first day of the trial the judge asked me to present myself and then said I was excused. I asked the usher why and he said something about a junior counsel having met me socially before, or something. It's actually a good thing that happened because it turned out I had worked with one of the main witnesses before and just wasn't listening when they asked if we knew any of the witnesses. I never found out who it was that knew me. Thank God I was thrown off though as the case ended up being the longest one in Irish legal history, 6 months of showing up to court at the far end of town.
Has anyone else been drafted? Share your jury stories here.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

the beer revolu

Two colleagues at work have been called in the last couple of weeks.
I'm lead to believe that a letter from your employer stating that you are important doesn't wash anymore.

Yyhhuuu

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

Are jurors allowed to tell people about the trials they've been involved in?

I know there is nothing to stop people blabbing but are you supposed to not talk about it.

I see no problem after a trial. I did not examine the Law on this matter tho

Psychiatric Patrick

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

I see no problem after a trial. I did not examine the Law on this matter tho

I've never thought about it before.

If it is allowed I would imagine the big trials get spoken about but I've never seen or heard a juror's story before?

koutoubia

the beer revolu wrote: »

Two colleagues at work have been called in the last couple of weeks.
I'm lead to believe that a letter from your employer stating that you are important doesn't wash anymore.

The judge that was sitting in the case I was on told us that if any of our employers had an issue with us attending that they were come to see him directly in the High Court!
That solved that issue.

[Deleted User]

the beer revolu wrote: »

Two colleagues at work have been called in the last couple of weeks.
I'm lead to believe that a letter from your employer stating that you are important doesn't wash anymore.

koutoubia wrote: »

The judge that was sitting in the case I was on told us that if any of our employers had an issue with us attending that they were come to see him directly in the High Court!
That solved that issue.

Worked no problem for me at the start of the year and just over a year before that also. Sent in the letter and got my letter of excusal within a few days. Not sure why a judge would say “come in to see him” there judge is not involved at the stage of calling you for duty it’s just some officer in the court.

The fact is though it’s the truth my employer could not afford to have me gone for a period of time were I to get put on a long running case. Almost all my projects would come to a standstill. It’s totally unreasonable taking people out of work for jury duty in many situations.

SEPT 23 1989

I would like to do it but being self employed I never will

Eire Go Brach

I found it very interesting. Although I had an assault case. A teen got a few digs in the park. Was not injured to badly.

Loads of tea and biscuits. Food was ok as well. Week of work.

RasTa

Just remembered the second case was so boring that the judge fell asleep a few times.

It was Brian Lenihan's wife

Eldudeson

Got the summons twice. First time I'd only started a new job and was still training so got a letter to let me off.
Second time I went there for 2 weeks to be in the jury pool of about 200. In every morning at 10am for a roll call and the jury was selected. Never selected and home by 1. It was a very relaxing fortnight and I got through a good bit of reading that I rarely have time for any more.
I wouldn't mind being on an actual jury in the future but my God the processes in there are so outdated and slow that it's a joke. In the 3 hours to select the jury and send the pool home there was probably about 20 - 30 minutes of actual court work. The rest was sitting about and waiting for stuff to happen.

Yyhhuuu

Enzo Full Tourist wrote: »

Worked no problem for me at the start of the year and just over a year before that also. Sent in the letter and got my letter of excusal within a few days. Not sure why a judge would say “come in to see him” there judge is not involved at the stage of calling you for duty it’s just some officer in the court.

The fact is though it’s the truth my employer could not afford to have me gone for a period of time were I to get put on a long running case. Almost all my projects would come to a standstill. It’s totally unreasonable taking people out of work for jury duty in many situations.

Yes and why has the Juries Act not been updated. Too many in the "golden circle" exempt from Jury Duty

pgj2015

I got a letter asking me to be on a jury about 7 years ago, I was studying law at the time so I was interested in doing it. But then i got another letter to say they were PLEASED to inform me that I had been excused from jury duty. I wonder what the reason was, do defending solicitors have a look at the potential jury and object to say males from 25-30 or women from 45-55?

Gregor Samsa

Served on one for an assault case years ago. Everyone said to me to get a letter from my job saying I couldn't do it - I couldn't understand why, much rather play Matlock for a few days than work. Boss even tried to give me a letter, but I told him I wasn't working on anything that couldn't wait a week. Selection took one day, then the trial 2, and half a day deliberation and verdict. I had long dreadlocks at the time and I was sure they were going to reject me, but I got selected. I'm not religious, and I would usually not opt to swear on the Bible, but I did that time as I didn't want to be seen to rock the boat in case I got rejected.

Glad I did it, and I'd do it again if called. Very interesting to see some of the mechanics of justice at work.

ThewhiteJesus

i was called last year and ended up on a difficult jury for a difficult case.
But i didn't try and weasel out of it, it's a civic duty and i was treated very well during the case.

[Deleted User]

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

Yes and why has the Juries Act not been updated. Too many in the "golden circle" exempt from Jury Duty

Is it still based on the electoral register? So if you're not bothered to vote, you won't be bothered by a jury summons?

Surely they could use other lists - Revenue, Social Welfare?

Psychiatric Patrick

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I would like to do it but being self employed I never will

RasTa wrote: »

Just remembered the second case was so boring that the judge fell asleep a few times.

It was Brian Lenihan's wife

The case or the judge?

Psychiatric Patrick

pgj2015 wrote: »

I got a letter asking me to be on a jury about 7 years ago, I was studying law at the time so I was interested in doing it. But then i got another letter to say they were PLEASED to inform me that I had been excused from jury duty. I wonder what the reason was, do defending solicitors have a look at the potential jury and object to say males from 25-30 or women from 45-55?

Maybe it was the persecution that objected?

To be honest, they were probably very unsure how someone who is both a man in in his late 20s and a woman in her late 40s would view the accused.

Yyhhuuu

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

i was called last year and ended up on a difficult jury for a difficult case.
But i didn't try and weasel out of it, it's a civic duty and i was treated very well during the case.

I wouldnt use the derogatory term "weasel out" when people have justifiable reasons for not attending. Perhaps the Legislators should tackle the huge amounts of professionals exempt from serving at trials for no justifiable reasons

Psychiatric Patrick

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

I wouldnt use the derogatory term "weasel out" when people have justifiable reasons for not attending. Perhaps the Legislators should tackle the huge amounts of professionals exempt from serving at trials for no justifiable reasons

"Weasel out" is accurate when you see the number of posters saying "get out of it" and having no reason other than not wanting to do it.

AndyBoBandy

I’ve been called up twice (both before the age of 22).

I made it onto a jury the 2nd time I was called up. Garda raided a guys house and found about 300k worth of drugs.

On day 2 of the trial the judge called us in and explained to us that because the Guards used warrant form 102.4 rev C Instead of form 102.4 rev D (or something to that effect), the raid was null and void and the guy walked.......

It explained why on day 1 and the beginning of day 2 the guy looked like he didn’t have a care in the world (he knew he’d be walking).

Gregor Samsa

pgj2015 wrote: »

I got a letter asking me to be on a jury about 7 years ago, I was studying law at the time so I was interested in doing it. But then i got another letter to say they were PLEASED to inform me that I had been excused from jury duty. I wonder what the reason was, do defending solicitors have a look at the potential jury and object to say males from 25-30 or women from 45-55?

This is only from my experience in the Dublin Central Criminal Court, so it may be different elsewhere.

When you're called, you're just in a big pool with loads of other people - there was over 100 the day I went. You wait. Then you get called to a particular court with about 20 other people. Other people get called it other courts. Some people didn't turn up, so some people who were on the list for one court get called to a different one.

You go in to the court and the give you a bit of a spiell. Each person is called up to be sworn in. Just at that moment, either the prosecution or defence can reject you. They don't give a reason. Sometimes they don't even look up to see who they're rejecting - it's part of the randomisation process, and they'll reject some people for absolutely no reason. If they don't reject you, you swear in and you're on the jury.

If you were excused before you even turned up at court, neither the prosecution or defence would have even been aware of you at that point, so whatever the reason was, it wasn't that either side didn't want you or your demographic.

keano_afc

Got summoned a few years ago. Mate of mine told me to go looking a bit scruffy so I wore an old tracksuit and didnt shave. There were loads of people there but wouldnt you know I was the first name out. I stepped up to be sworn in on a murder trial and I was challenged by the defence. You could hear my sigh of relief in all four courts.

I followed the trial in the press and it lasted 3 months. Dodged a massive bullet.

Psychiatric Patrick

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

I wouldnt use the derogatory term "weasel out" when people have justifiable reasons for not attending. Perhaps the Legislators should tackle the huge amounts of professionals exempt from serving at trials for no justifiable reasons

See the previous post.

Elwood_Blues

I got selected a few years back. It was an assault case if I remember correctly. We sat through 3 days of testimony or whatever you call it. Got our free lunches every day and a garda escort to the restaurant.

When the prosecution rested their case the Judge threw threw it for some reason..

Was gutted because it felt like we were in 12 Angry Men. But the lasting feeling was it seemed like such a waste of everyone's time and money.

Yyhhuuu

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

"Weasel out" is accurate when you see the number of posters saying "get out of it" and having no reason other than not wanting to do it.

Many had legitimate reasons for excusal

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

JasonStatham wrote: »

They wanted me for a pretty serious one. I had just started a new job, so I got my employer to write me a letter saying I felt I was going to miss out on essential training and that i was far too young for judging (18 y.o.).

I can't imagine your age excused you. It's supposed to be a cross-section.

FarmerBrowne

I'll see that Quimby kid hang for this.

Allinall

.anon. wrote: »

I've never been called up. I'd find a way out of it if I was.

I can't remember who said it originally, but when you go on trial, you're essentially putting your fate into the hands of twelve people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty.

mikeecho wrote: »

I'm exempt

Cos I know every Fu ker is guilty.

buried wrote: »

Show up with a MAGA hat. You won't even be picked for your own funeral wearing one a them things.

Hego Damask wrote: »

I'd just refuse to go, f*ck that sh*t

2018na wrote: »

Got one of those letters a couple of years back. You are summoned to Trim court for jury selection. Am I fcuk summoned for anything. Did not reply or do anything. People making up excuses like 5 year olds. Nothing will happen

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

I wouldnt use the derogatory term "weasel out" when people have justifiable reasons for not attending. Perhaps the Legislators should tackle the huge amounts of professionals exempt from serving at trials for no justifiable reasons

These are just from the first page of this thread.

Yyhhuuu

Allinall wrote: »

These are just from the first page of this thread.

Youre being selective.What about the others who had legitimate reasons?

Allinall

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

Youre being selective.What about the others who had legitimate reasons?

I don't have an issue with them.

mojesius

I've been called for the panel twice, selected to serve once.

It was quite a harrowing case, went on for 8 days and we all got a lifetime exemption from the judge afterwards, but I'd still serve again if called up.

I don't really understand why people try to weasel out of it. Sure if you have kids to mind or a struggling business to keep afloat, I get it but everyone else should be prepared to do their civic duty.