Jury Duty With Marijuana Case

[llou 0]

I have been called for jury duty for this whole month. On my first morning to report, I was selected to serve on a jury for a case of "possession with intent to ditribute." During the jury selection process, we were asked if we had any strong feelings about the use or legalization of marijuana one way or the other that might impair our ability to be truly impartial in judging the case. We were not asked directly if we had ever smoked it ourselves, but we were asked if we had been around anyone smoking it and whether our past experiences being around the drug might influence our ablitly to be totally objective.So ... you are standing in a courtroom, in front of the judge and about 40 other people. You've raised your hand and sworn to answer all the questions truthfully. How do you answer those questions? And as you listen to the evidence and have to reach a verdict (and then decide a sentence), would you have any biases that would effect your decisions?It took 3 days to select a jury and hear the evidence -- and 9 hours of deliberation today to finish the case. It was like a movie. We had 11 people who were basically in agreement and 1 "hold-out" who saw everything differently. I am exhausted, but satisfied wth the outcome -- I think.How would you all feel about serving on such a jury?llou

[SuperJon 175]

Pretty sure it's illegal to talk about a case if you've been elected to serve jury duty. Then again it is doubtful that anyone involved would frequent this forum. So to answer your question in your post that I really didn't read, only if she gives consent.

[llou 0]

Pretty sure it's illegal to talk about a case if you've been elected to serve jury duty. Then again it is doubtful that anyone involved would frequent this forum. So to answer your question in your post that I really didn't read, only if she gives consent.

It's totally legal to talk about it now that the case is over. The judge made that very clear. Up until 7pm Eastern Time tonight, I could not talk about it with anyone, not even my fellow jury members. That may explain my need to talk about it now. We are free to tall anyone whatever details we wish to disclose.

[SuperJon 175]

It's totally legal to talk about it now that the case is over. The judge made that very clear. Up until 7pm Eastern Time tonight, I could not talk about it with anyone, not even my fellow jury members. That may explain my need to talk about it now. We are free to tall anyone whatever details we wish to disclose.

Oh I see. Well in that case, do her quick, but wear a raincoat.

[princeof56k 0]

I have been called for jury duty for this whole month. On my first morning to report, I was selected to serve on a jury for a case of "possession with intent to ditribute." During the jury selection process, we were asked if we had any strong feelings about the use or legalization of marijuana one way or the other that might impair our ability to be truly impartial in judging the case We were not asked directly if we had ever smoked it ourselves, but we were asked if we had been around anyone smoking it and whether our past experiences being around the drug might influence our ablitly to be totally objective.So ... you are standing in a courtroom, in front of the judge and about 40 other people. You've raised your hand and sworn to answer all the questions truthfully. How do you answer those questions? And as you listen to the evidence and have to reach a verdict (and then decide a sentence), would you have any biases that would effect your decisions?It took 3 days to select a jury and hear the evidence -- and 9 hours of deliberation today to finish the case. It was like a movie. We had 11 people who were basically in agreement and 1 "hold-out" who saw everything differently. I am exhausted, but satisfied wth the outcome -- I think.How would you all feel about serving on such a jury?llou

Read what I bolded. How did you respond to that?I was once called for jury duty and they asked me a specific question, "There is a one witness law in Texas. Meaning the word on one witness is enough to put someone away. If you are on a jury, could you put someone away based on the testimony of one wintess?" (At least the question was something like that). I answered an emphatic NO. I would not do that. Needless to say I was out of there. If you have a problem with the laws, you need to say so up front.

[keith crime 8]

Doug Stanhope says if you want to give it to the man -- two words - NOT GUILTY

[Canuckickstan 2]

[Yoda 1]

It's very easy to answer those questions. If the defendant had weed, you are pro legalization, If the defendant is black, you hate black people. Say whatever you have to so that you don't get selected and don't have to waste all that time on a jury.

[llou 0]

Read what I bolded. How did you respond to that?I was once called for jury duty and they asked me a specific question, "There is a one witness law in Texas. Meaning the word on one witness is enough to put someone away. If you are on a jury, could you put someone away based on the testimony of one wintess?" (At least the question was something like that). I answered an emphatic NO. I would not do that. Needless to say I was out of there. If you have a problem with the laws, you need to say so up front.

I said that I could remain unbiased and I believe that to be the truth. My feelings about marijuana are not that strong one way or the other. I have doubts about the current laws, but I don't have beliefs that are strong enough to cause me any great inner conflicts about convicting someone who was violating the law. I could accept the role of judging whether or not the law was violated independently of making a judgment about the quality of the law. We were also asked the same question about being biased in relation to whether or not we had any relatives or close friends who are police officers. My nephew is a police officer, but I believe I can be unbiased when evaluating their testimony.We did convict the guy ... and I think that was the right decision for a lot of reaons ... but I still have this weird feeling about it all. Maybe it's just knowing that I sent 2 people to jail tonight -- one of them for a long time -- and the other one is a single mother with small children. On the other hand, they made the choice to engage in illegal activities. So they are the ones primarily responsible for the fact that they are now going to jail.

[DoinSublime 0]

I said that I could remain unbiased and I believe that to be the truth. My feelings about marijuana are not that strong one way or the other. I have doubts about the current laws, but I don't have beliefs that are strong enough to cause me any great inner conflicts about convicting someone who was violating the law. I could accept the role of judging whether or not the law was violated independently of making a judgment about the quality of the law. We were also asked the same question about being biased in relation to whether or not we had any relatives or close friends who are police officers. My nephew is a police officer, but I believe I can be unbiased when evaluating their testimony.We did convict the guy ... and I think that was the right decision for a lot of reaons ... but I still have this weird feeling about it all. Maybe it's just knowing that I sent 2 people to jail tonight -- one of them for a long time -- and the other one is a single mother with small children. On the other hand, they made the choice to engage in illegal activities. So they are the ones primarily responsible for the fact that they are now going to jail.

I probably wouldn't be selected for jury duty, as I would never send someone to jail for anything to do with marijuana. Because of that though, I may just say under oath that I could be unbiased, and then I would be that one holdout for the freedom of my fellow man. I don't think anyone should be sent prison for anything to do with marijuana. But...that's just how I feel about marijuana.Was it just marijuana? Were they slinging anything else? How were they found with possession with intent? Were they pulled over and just had a lot of doaf? Was it a sting operation?

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

It's very easy to answer those questions. If the defendant had weed, you are pro legalization, If the defendant is black, you hate black people. Say whatever you have to so that you don't get selected and don't have to waste all that time on a jury.

I did that very thing. I was selected, and the case involved a meth lab or something, I said that my sister had a meth addiction that destroyed her and her family, and I couldn't possibly be objective. Off I went. BTW, I'm an only child. Also, I told that story at a poker table once, to a man who was running for judge in king county washington ( it was election night, and he didn't know the results) He just laughed.

[llou 0]

I probably wouldn't be selected for jury duty, as I would never send someone to jail for anything to do with marijuana. Because of that though, I may just say under oath that I could be unbiased, and then I would be that one holdout for the freedom of my fellow man. I don't think anyone should be sent prison for anything to do with marijuana. But...that's just how I feel about marijuana.Was it just marijuana? Were they slinging anything else? How were they found with possession with intent? Were they pulled over and just had a lot of doaf? Was it a sting operation?

The defendent and his brother (and his brother's girlfriend) were running a pot house out of which they sold large volumes of marijuana and smoked a lot with their friends. They also hads guns, which is another felony (the combination of guns and possession with intent to sell is a felony). There were also 3 small children in the home and a lot of little kids in the immediate neighborhood. Some of the kids were cousins etc. and would be in and out of the house. The woman was also charged with child neglect and the man charged with "maintaining a public nuisance." The pictures taken during the police raid were interesting with a couple of pounds of marijuana sitting on the couch next to an assault rifle, with a sippy cup and 2 bongs on the coffee table. There was another half pound of marijuana on an end table and a shotgone on the loveseat. The kitchen table had 2 more bongs, a grinder, an opened majiuana bag another sippy cup, diapers, and breakfast cereal. The one brother was wearing a heavy flack jacket (as if expecting trouble) and a visitor had a concealed weapon that was loaded with a magazine and a bullet in the chamber and the safety off (ready to shoot).I have always considered myself "in the middle" on the marijuana issue -- OK with legalization, but not really passionate about it. Being around someone smoking a single joint has never bothered me and it never seemed right to have that be illegal. But seeing this house and the dangers that these kids (and this neighborhood) were exposed to due to the fact that these sales were occuring there, it was hard to approve of what was going on there -- not just the guns, but the easy access to both the guns and the drugs that the children had. It's also almost impossible to believe that the kids would not be exposed to the smoke if they lived in a house with so much use going on.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

I have always considered myself "in the middle" on the marijuana issue -- OK with legalization, but not really passionate about it. Being around someone smoking a single joint has never bothered me and it never seemed right to have that be illegal. But seeing this house and the dangers that these kids (and this neighborhood) were exposed to due to the fact that these sales were occuring there, it was hard to approve of what was going on there -- not just the guns, but the easy access to both the guns and the drugs that the children had. It's also almost impossible to believe that the kids would not be exposed to the smoke if they lived in a house with so much use going on.

Now, do you think that all the guns were around because of the marijuana itself or because marijuana is illegal and therefore is forced to be associated with many other things illegal? Do you think that if marijuana was legal and it was legal to farm it, all marijuana farmers would have shotguns lying around their kitchens?To modern day tobacco farmers live the way that illegal marijuana farmers live? Is that because marijuana is intrinsically more evil than tobacco, or because of the stigma that it has been given due to the fact that it is illegal?

[llou 0]

Now, do you think that all the guns were around because of the marijuana itself or because marijuana is illegal and therefore is forced to be associated with many other things illegal? Do you think that if marijuana was legal and it was legal to farm it, all marijuana farmers would have shotguns lying around their kitchens?To modern day tobacco farmers live the way that illegal marijuana farmers live? Is that because marijuana is intrinsically more evil than tobacco, or because of the stigma that it has been given due to the fact that it is illegal?

Of course. You're making the obvious point. The level of violence would be greatly reduced were marijuana legal. I know that. I am not stupid. That's not my question. That question was also not my dilemma this week. I wasn't on a panel trying to decide whether or not marijuana should be legalized or not. I was on a jury having to decide whether or not to allow that family to continue to run that pot house in that way with those kids living there at the present time.You are talking in abstrct principles. I was faced with a concrete situation involving real people (including children) in immediate danger from both guns and marijuana smoke exposure.So ... as a member of the jury ... your don't have the power to change the law. But you need to vote on what happens with that particular family this week. Would you really vote to let the situation in that house continue?

[Heraclitus_V 0]

I feel about marijuana as I do about all laws restricting behavior with no victims.legalize all:naturally grown herbs, plants, etc. prostitution sexual orientation gamblingand start jailing politicians and corporate thievesit gets me out of jury duty every time

[llou 0]

I feel about marijuana as I do about all laws restricting behavior with no victims.legalize all:naturally grown herbs, plants, etc. prostitution sexual orientation gamblingand start jailing politicians and corporate thievesit gets me out of jury duty every time

So ... what you are saying is that you would run away from the responsibility of deciding what to do about this particular family and the dangers they were exposing their kids to. Isn't that awfully wussy?I have no problems with a consenting adult choosing to smoke a joint. But I have problems with raising children in a house in which they will be frequently exposed to the smoke.

[Heraclitus_V 0]

So ... what you are saying is that you would run away from the responsibility of deciding what to do about this particular family and the dangers they were exposing their kids to. Isn't that awfully wussy?I have no problems with a consenting adult choosing to smoke a joint. But I have problems with raising children in a house in which they will be frequently exposed to the smoke.

how sweet... I have absolutely no problem ignoring morons or their spawnI would have no way of knowing before the trial about the poor unfortunate rug rats who will soon be entering the correctional system.If the laws were changed their would be regulation and taxation to deal with social problems... and no matter what we do there will be idiots and morons who should not breed.

[llou 0]

how sweet... I have absolutely no problem ignoring morons or their spawnI would have no way of knowing before the trial about the poor unfortunate rug rats who will soon be entering the correctional system.If the laws were changed their would be regulation and taxation to deal with social problems... and no matter what we do there will be idiots and morons who should not breed.

1. Actually, we DID know about the poor unfortunate rug rats. We were read the specific charges and introduced to the defendents, all the lawyers, and all the witnesses BEFORE we were interviewed as potential jurors.2. I still think it is wussy to run away.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

You are talking in abstrct principles. I was faced with a concrete situation involving real people (including children) in immediate danger from both guns and marijuana smoke exposure.So ... as a member of the jury ... your don't have the power to change the law. But you need to vote on what happens with that particular family this week. Would you really vote to let the situation in that house continue?

Fine, here's my answer to the question you wanted. It is your job to be a part of the legal system, which includes spending time on the jury. As a citizen, it is your job to be honest and to do your job properly. So, answer the lawyer’s initial questions honestly. If you believe that your personal stance toward marijuana may influence your ability to come to an unbiased conclusion, say so. When presented with the case, if it is obvious that the person broke the law, then vote to put them in jail. It is your job as a member of the jury not to make the laws or to change them, but rather to determine whether or not the person objectively broke the law.You can find other places to be Henry David Thoreau if you're really against the marijuana laws.

[DoinSublime 0]

The defendent and his brother (and his brother's girlfriend) were running a pot house out of which they sold large volumes of marijuana and smoked a lot with their friends. They also hads guns, which is another felony (the combination of guns and possession with intent to sell is a felony). There were also 3 small children in the home and a lot of little kids in the immediate neighborhood. Some of the kids were cousins etc. and would be in and out of the house. The woman was also charged with child neglect and the man charged with "maintaining a public nuisance." The pictures taken during the police raid were interesting with a couple of pounds of marijuana sitting on the couch next to an assault rifle, with a sippy cup and 2 bongs on the coffee table. There was another half pound of marijuana on an end table and a shotgone on the loveseat. The kitchen table had 2 more bongs, a grinder, an opened majiuana bag another sippy cup, diapers, and breakfast cereal. The one brother was wearing a heavy flack jacket (as if expecting trouble) and a visitor had a concealed weapon that was loaded with a magazine and a bullet in the chamber and the safety off (ready to shoot).I have always considered myself "in the middle" on the marijuana issue -- OK with legalization, but not really passionate about it. Being around someone smoking a single joint has never bothered me and it never seemed right to have that be illegal. But seeing this house and the dangers that these kids (and this neighborhood) were exposed to due to the fact that these sales were occuring there, it was hard to approve of what was going on there -- not just the guns, but the easy access to both the guns and the drugs that the children had. It's also almost impossible to believe that the kids would not be exposed to the smoke if they lived in a house with so much use going on.

Ugh. Ugly case all around. York makes a great point though.

[Heraclitus_V 0]

I don't give a damn! I will not participate in a forum to enforce unjust laws... if it is a case of theft or injury to another party I have no problem with the legal system. I am sick and tired of nanny laws designed to protect religious dogma. I am sick of the lowest common denominator and their idiot spawn dictating what adults are allowed to do in private, or in public when there is no harm to the public... It is a tragedy that the people are on trial for making a living, growing herb and selling it... maybe all farmers should put their kids in orphanages. Maybe the kids will grow up to know the capitalist system better than our idiot prezodent and distill a cancer cure from an illegal plant. Maybe their parents had good jobs and lost them and had no choice but to enter a subculture, or maybe they were just idiot stoners who got so wasted that they forgot to wear a rubber... I DON"T CARE! This country is populated by ignorant people, and THEY are the ones who should be on trial... I'll be down by the river getting high and cleaning my weapons, send your kids down for a swim... I'm the lifeguard

[llou 0]

Fine, here's my answer to the question you wanted. It is your job to be a part of the legal system, which includes spending time on the jury. As a citizen, it is your job to be honest and to do your job properly. So, answer the lawyer’s initial questions honestly. If you believe that your personal stance toward marijuana may influence your ability to come to an unbiased conclusion, say so. When presented with the case, if it is obvious that the person broke the law, then vote to put them in jail. It is your job as a member of the jury not to make the laws or to change them, but rather to determine whether or not the person objectively broke the law.You can find other places to be Henry David Thoreau if you're really against the marijuana laws.

You are right. I think that was the answer I was looking for. I did what you suggested in your post. I answered the jury selection questions honestly (because I had sworn to tell the truth and I am not a liar -- poker bluffing excepted of course) and voted "guilty." As DoinSublime said, it was an ugly situation and it was a very intense 4 days during which I was not allowed to discuss the case with anyone. We could not even discuss it with the other jurors except during official deliberations, which were somewhat structured and formal. That's why I needed to find somewhere and some people with which to discuss it to help me sort it all out once it was over. There were upset people in the courtroom: there was a juror crying during the deliberations: there were angry people, nervous people, scared people. It was all very intense and serious and I have not been allowed to talk about it -- and I am a person who likes to talk about things to help me sort them out in head.Thank you for your participation in this thread.

[theresa113 0]

llou,I personally wished marijuana was legalized for so many reasons, such as cancer and aids patients having easy access to help with nausea.However, it sounds like you made the right decision. I am all for protecting children. Having guns around and an element of crime is not raising your kids in a good environment. Imagine if one of those kids picked up a gun and accidentally shot themselves or another kid? In my opinion, you helped to prevent a future tragedy. I can only imagine how unsettling this trial was for you as I know if I was involved, I would feel torn and wonder if I made the right decision as well. It is easy for all of us to state I would do this or I would do that but until you are in the hot seat, no one really knows what exactly they would do nor would they realize the flood of emotions based on the circumstance as well as the stress of being cooped up for days and not being able to talk about the trial.From what I have read here and your other post on the forum, I am confident you made the right decision and I hope you can rest easy. Take care, t

[llou 0]

Thanks, Theresa.

[llou 0]

Perhaps nobody cares, but I thought I would add this piece of information I just learned today:The guy I convicted on Thursday of selling marijuana was arrested for that crime last May. Since then, he's been arrested twice more -- for selling heroin. We weren't told that at the trial for the marijuana offense, of course.He really is not one of the "good guys."