“Jury duty is like the speed limit,” writes Nathan Koppel in a WSJ article entitled, ‘Excuse Me, Your Honor, The Dog Ate My Civic Duty.’ “We know we’re supposed to honor it, but we try to skirt it anyway. Businesspeople and professionals are some of the worst offenders, believing they are too busy to serve, especially on long trials. For a system that shapes defendants’ fortunes and lives, and depends on fairness and balance, there’s a whole lot of gaming going on.”
Here are some examples: citing planned vacations and nonrefundable plane tickets; blaming baggage that gender, age, race and class are presumed to represent; nursing babies; and running small businesses.
The gamesmanship extends to lawyers, too, Koppel writes, who winnow out prospective jurors they think will decide against them, and lobbyists, who try to shape the jury pool by influencing states’ selection methods. The damning conclusion is this: It’s all based on assumptions that look shrewd and often turn out to be wrong.
As a result, many states are seeking remedies for juror absenteeism, such as increasing juror pay, shortening the waiting period to be picked for juries and casting a wider net for prospective jurors. New York eradicated a seemingly random list of exempt occupations, including clergy, foot doctors and embalmers. In Indiana, ferry-boat captains no longer get a pass. Starting next year in Tennessee, “habitual drunkards” will have to line up, as best they can, to perform their civic duty, as will certified public accountants.
Judith Kaye, the chief judge of the State of New York Court of Appeals who has led the state’s jury reform efforts, says, “What kind of jury would you want if you were a defendant?” She adds: “Jury duty is for everyone, not just for people who aren’t smart or powerful enough to get out of it.”
Source
