Yesterday I had my first experience as a juror.
When they sent me the questionnaire months ago, I filled it out (because I love filling out forms!) and sent it back in. Just last week I got a letter from a Ms. Sadler of the circuit court. It had already fled my mind that jury duty was even an option for me, so I was surprised to see that I had been selected for jury service. The letter asked me to appear at the courthouse on January 26th at 8:30 AM. Sheesh. Thankfully, I wasn’t scheduled to work at Sutherlands that morning, but I was looking forward to the 3rd class of the semester and giving a lecture on a little bit of pre-history before we got into “MODERN ART”. I kept my hopes up that the telephone recording they instructed me to call on Wednesday night would tell me that there was no need for me to report for jury duty. Sadly, it wasn’t so! So I canceled classes, made an alternative assignment, and hoped for the NEXT best possible scenario; that I would not be selected to actually serve on the jury.
During the selection of the jury the lawyers from both defendant and plaintiff asked us questions regarding possible experiences or prejudices which might taint or influence our judgements of the circumstances. I was only able to offer my hand up once, when they asked if there was anyone else on the jury panel that we knew. (My dad’s cousin Steve Cox was also there that morning.) Of course, more than half the people there were able to raise their hands because Sedalia is a small town and everybody knows everybody else. ;-)
So, unfortunately, being unable to offer any objections or prejudices, Juror #22 was selected for duty that day. The opening statements were given around 10:30 and we took a lunch break from 11:30 to 1:00. We returned and listened to witnesses and saw more evidence. Dinner from 5:30 to 6:45. We gave our final verdict?, if that’s the right word, at about 9:00 PM. A 12.5 hour day that I will be paid $18.00 for. They’ll probably take taxes out of it, too. -_-
The case was civil, involving a man who did odd jobs for an older lady. There was an accident where he fell off a ladder while cleaning her gutters and the jury was to decide where the fault lie. There was a LOT of information to consider. The man’s experience, the ladder, the surface on which the ladder was placed, whether or not anyone was holding the ladder (I don’t know how this was a point of contention!? How could you not know? Yes or No.), the odd way the handyman and old woman’s relationship changed after the accident (There seemed to be a very awkward avoidance afterwards…), and of course, the man’s injuries, surgery, and recovery. The man was asking for the woman to cover his medical bills for the surgery to repair a burst fracture in his lumbar vertebrate.
To be honest, I’d kind of scoffed at folks who file a suit against someone when they are injured on their property or doing something for them. But after seeing this and becoming a little more familiar with the law and the definitions surrounding “negligence” and “ordinary care”, I can definitely see why folks get paid off for stuff like that.
Another difficult think about the deliberation and coming to a ruling was that we were only allowed to consider information that was given as evidence in court. We were not supposed to make assumptions or form personal opinions about the old woman or the handyman. Only the facts. AND, only the facts that were presented to us. Although we were close enough to overhear conversations between the judge and the lawyers while they were at the bench, we were not supposed to factor in those remarks to our decision.
Ultimately, we ruled that each party was equally at fault and awarded the handyman a little over half of the money he was asking for. Thinking about it now, I wish I had argued for more money for him, since he had a little family, seemed to be an all-around good guy, and was not asking for ridiculous amounts of money for “pain and suffering” or even lost wages. I think it was very reasonable. I regret not realizing then that the old woman surely had homeowner’s insurance (although that fact was not presented in court) and that would probably easily cover the $56,000 that was owed for his spinal surgery and prevented their family that burden that will last them so many years… Doesn’t seem that unfair to me. But then I think of the old lady juror who thought the fault was entirely with the handyman and wanted to give him nothing. That’s fucked up.
It was an experience. I can’t say I’m looking forward to the next one, but I would certainly do it again.
(Only I hope it’s not that judge again, ’cause I don’t like the way he chomped on the ice from his Sonic drink.)
