Prejudice against biker pays off

[blackdog]

Had jury service. My name comes up in the ballot for some tax evasion case. As I approach the jury area the crown lawyer uses a challenge so I'm stood down. I guess the helmet and leathers in addition to the biker stereotype in her eyes added up to someone she thought wasn't going to help the prosecution.

Fantastic, as the last thing I wanted was to spend a week listening to expert testimony from a bunch of accountants. So glad I didn't take the car.

[Oakie]

as the last thing I wanted was to spend a week listening to expert testimony from a bunch of accountants.

...now THAT sounds more like a punishment than anything white collar criminals usually get.

[The Lone Rider]

I dunno... as long as I bring a book and some nice snacks while waiting around before the trial, I found it a good change of pace from my day job.

Wouldn't want to do it more than once though.

[cheshirecat]

Was asked once and sent a reply back in carefuly indescipherable handwriting that since i was designing a show (true) it would jeapodise the production if selected (true). Also included some stray colour powder pigments in the letter to ensure they would remember me. Never been asked again.

[GingerMidget]

Good thinking. Id say I would want to do jury service, but I can barely get a full two day weekend at the moment, I don't imagine I'd get a week off to listen to some overweight guy in a suit whining about how his client is innocent.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Was asked once and sent a reply back in carefuly indescipherable handwriting that since i was designing a show (true) it would jeapodise the production if selected (true). Also included some stray colour powder pigments in the letter to ensure they would remember me. Never been asked again.

I was asked twice. Didn't want to go either time. First time I wrote explaining that my company was short staffed and my absence would jeopordise the company's viability. They excused me.

Second time (was about a year later) I figured I didn't want to be having to make excuses repeatadly in the future so wrote them to advise that I didn't want to be a jurour, that I was a racist and as the majority of crime was comitted by the minority, I would be very unlikely to give an unbiased verdict. I then stated that if they didn't believe me then they must reason that I was a liar and was therefore not fit for jury duty.

Got a letter back stating that I was excused from any future jury duty. :laugh:

[steve_t]

I LOL at the letter they send you when they excuse you. Something along the lines of "OK, we'll let you off just this once...." :spanking:

[danchop]

do they vette jurors?i got chosen on a jury for an assualt case about 10 years ago,yet i had been convicted for assualt myself previously?

[Zedder]

do they vette jurors?i got chosen on a jury for an assualt case about 10 years ago,yet i had been convicted for assualt myself previously?

Vetting is meant to be carried out. Maybe you came under the "clean slate" criteria.

What makers me laugh is that everyone I've heard of has got off jury service so it must be bloody hard for them to get people.

[avgas]

I have never been called.
I often wonder if Jury's are just compiled of unemployed.

[gijoe1313]

I got a call for jury duty several years back, wrote in a letter stating as I was an educator it didn't make sense for me to be away from my classes, especially with the seniors approaching the end of year exams. Got the standard letter back saying I was excused from jury duty. Though, apparently they are now cracking down on this, since so few teachers ever end up as jurors!

[Gremlin]

Yeah, they're cracking down now much harder (probably because it's a lot harder to find anyone).

Been summoned once, wrote in, I was on call 24/7 to respond to issues if they arose and I had to sort them out (which I was), and there was no-one to cover me (the joys of small businesses). Got off.

Dad got summoned, wrote in saying he didn't believe in all this soft punishment and felt he wanted harsher sentences. Got off as well. One of his guys was summoned, wrote in on his behalf, needed him, got refused.

Reality is, got too much stuff on to deal with jury service :laugh:

[Usarka]

Trial by jury - your fate is in the hands of 12 people who are too stupid to get off jury service.

[oneofsix]

Trial by jury - your fate is in the hands of 12 people who are too stupid to get off jury service.

perhaps not for much longer


The Law Commission has proposed a radical shake-up of New Zealand's trial system, suggesting the dumping of 12-person juries in favour of "semi-professional" trained jurors and judge alone trials

[superman]

Had jury service. My name comes up in the ballot for some tax evasion case. As I approach the jury area the crown lawyer uses a challenge so I'm stood down. I guess the helmet and leathers in addition to the biker stereotype in her eyes added up to someone she thought wasn't going to help the prosecution.

Fantastic, as the last thing I wanted was to spend a week listening to expert testimony from a bunch of accountants. So glad I didn't take the car.

When I got called I was challenged. Joys of being too young for 'life experience' in the views of most old folk.

[slofox]

I've been summoned many times in the last 26 years. But since I am self-employed and in a parlous financial state they always let me off...pays to be poor.

[ducatilover]

perhaps not for much longer
:niceone: That'll be a piss easy job, I'm in.

[Virago]

...I guess the helmet and leathers in addition to the biker stereotype in her eyes added up to someone she thought wasn't going to help the prosecution...

You could be challenged for any reason - age, ethnicity, where you live, occupation, blah blah. It's easy to jump on the prejudice bandwagon, but rather pointless.

I've had the call-up twice - both times been challenged and never made a jury. I guess they're prejudiced against short-arsed white middle-class males...

You can be challenged by either the defence or prosecution, at any time from the time your name is called until your bum hits the jury bench. At one of the trials I was called up for they had a huge juror turn-out, and both lawyers were taking it in turns to challenge repeatedly - and in the end seemed to be having a game to see how close to sitting they could get a potential juror before challenging. It ended when the judge ruled that a juror had actually sat down, and he over-ruled the challenge - and made a pointed remark about "game over".

[schrodingers cat]

I got called up a couple of years ago and it turned out to be that Clayton Weatherspoon asshole.
I never got picked but simply watching him walk to the stand and say a couple of words I could have mailed my verdict in there and then.

[davereid]

I have been called for a few jurys, and been on a couple.

But I have made my views on a wide range of subjects widely known and don't expect I would be able to enter a jury unchallenged now.

I won't convict on principle on a wide range of cases regardless of the wording of the law.

My view is the bill of rights is absolute. Even if another law allows it to be ignored I will not. So any case where the bill of rights has been breached, even if allowed for in law, I will ignore evidence collected in breach of the BOR.

Same as legislation passed under urgency. I will ignore the letter of the law, and look at the wider principles. Even if its shown that the law was broken, but I think the law should not exist = not guilty.

Take the illegally gathered evidence against the Urewera 4. No point showing me. The evidence was collected contrary to the BOR. So I will not consider it.

[nzmikey]

So how does 1 end up on this shit train to nowhere ??

[pritch]

So how does 1 end up on this shit train to nowhere ??

It's the kind of raffle you don't want to win. I suspect they use the electoral rolls?

I was excused the only time I've been called. Three people I know have been on jury duty and all three thought most of the rest of the jurors were idiots. Didn't listed to evidence or legal arguments, but came to their decisions because of the appearance of the accused: his colour, his complexion, his cardigan, or other such nonsense.

The Receptionist at work was called a few months ago and was keen to serve, turned out she knew the Crown Solicitor, the defence lawyer, and the accused. She asked one of the staff to pass a message to the judge. His honour then announced to all and sundry the she would be excused because of her occupation. She was actually pissed off.

[Macontour]

I got excused a few times, worked for a small company and being short of staff would have been a hardship but while between jobs I got called and attended. Got challenged the first day and sat on a trial on the second day.

The toing and froing between the prosecution and defence was silly at times but the debate in the jury room was pretty robust. Ended up with a hung jury, the second one for the case as the Judge informed us later.

It was interesting to be part of our "justice" system and see how it works.

I also defended myself years ago on a "careless use" charge. Still got convicted but felt that I got off pretty lightly. The Judge seemed pleasantly surprised to deal with someone wearing a nice shirt and tie, who looked him in the eye, addressed him as Sir, had a good work history, was articulate and had well thought out arguments and provided a written reference that caused His Honour to say "thats a very good reference, I wish I had got ones as good as that when I was younger"!!!

He even said that I was unlikely to lose my licence after I explained the difficulties that would cause and when the Police Prosecutor played his Trump Card, my "previous history to be taken into consideration", the Judge looked at it and pointed out that they were all pretty minor and the last one had been about 6 years prior so he wasn't really concerned.

Still got found guilty which was not unexpected, I was just trying to minimise the punishment and figured I had more at stake than some Lawyer who would just cost me more money.

[FJRider]

The public (and Lawyers) perception of bikers is bad enough to get challenged ... and dismissed from jury service .... And you like that ??? Perhaps this will start helping you to understand why the law makers may pass laws, to the detriment of those (us) nasty bad bikers.

It is not an image ... or perception that is really in our long term interest ...

[nzmikey]

It's the kind of raffle you don't want to win. I suspect they use the electoral rolls?

I was excused the only time I've been called. Three people I know have been on jury duty and all three thought most of the rest of the jurors were idiots. Didn't listed to evidence or legal arguments, but came to their decisions because of the appearance of the accused: his colour, his complexion, his cardigan, or other such nonsense.

Mint so there is a great chance I wont be called up :woohoo: since i aint enrolled to vote. ( & before any of you go on the " it is illegal not to be " & "the if you dont vote you cant winge train " yes I know all of this )

& 2nd of all yeah I would prob be the same ..... Take 1 look at him / her ..... Nup guilty as sin due to race / colour .:shutup:

[jrandom]

I've been called up once. Got myself excused because I was working on a contract development job at the time and hell would've frozen over before the client would've accepted me disappearing for two weeks.

Of course, this is a problem with the system. Basically, anyone with a real job can and does get excused. I rather suspect that this tends to result in juries formed of whatever mouth-breathers society can spare because they weren't doing anything useful.

If I'm ever (unjustly) charged with anything criminal, I'm going to ask for a judge-only trial.

[Usarka]

+1 on the judge trial.

From my single experience, in a room full of lawyers and police, the judge was the only caring and honest person in the room. Except for me of course :whistle:

[Bald Eagle]

Never been called for jury service I 'spect theres a mark on my file says ex '50 , even though I've been out since 91

Sent from my MB525 using Tapatalk

[BMWST?]

i been called a few times,got off a couple ot times.challenged of one,and didnt even make the panel a few times(ballot).one other time the whole panel was discharged after the jury was picked as the trial was expected to go a few weeks

[jrandom]

+1 on the judge trial.

From my single experience, in a room full of lawyers and police, the judge was the only caring and honest person in the room.

Yes. I generally have a lot of time for judges.

Except for the old cunt who sentenced me more harshly for riding my motorbike while suspended on demerit points than he sentenced the drunk driver who came before me. Fair cop and all that, but the relative penalties (I got the same 6-month DQ, but a bigger fine) boggled me.

An eternal mystery, and a reminder of the occasionally arbitrary nature of our justice system.

[Smifffy]

I would willingly attend jury service if called. I would like to think that if anyone that I cared about was the victim of some nasty crime, and the perpetrator was caught and brought to trial, that an intelligent, well reasoned person would be able to spare a week or two out of their lives to participate in determining the facts of the matter.

To the people that think it's funny to avoid their jury service, I hope that you never need to rely on the criminal 'justice' system in NZ. Isn't it strange how so many people make all manner of demands on society but are prepared to put so little back in. I guess just paying tax is simply enough.

I wonder what it was about NZ that attracted some people here in the first place, surely can't have been the perceived crime rate.

[flyingcrocodile46]

I would like to think that ..... an intelligent, well reasoned person would be able to spare a week or two out of their lives

:lol::rofl::killingme One maybe........ if you are reeeaalllly lucky.

The other 11 will be the wall on which he breaks his skull.

[far queue]

I’ve been called for jury service 3 times and sat on a jury all 3 times. Each time the other jury members were all normal rational people, and intelligent debate/discussion was had in reaching a unanimous decision for 2 of the cases. In the 3rd case the defendant changed his plea to guilty after the first day, so we were dismissed, but the rest of the jury seemed normal enough up to that point. Neither of the two cases that went all the way were immediately unanimous – they both required debate, and one required going back to the judge for some clarification. I found the experience to be interesting, although the courtroom stuff can get a bit tedious and drag on sometimes. Oh and all the jury members were in full time employment. None of the jury members fit the stereotypes being made by a number of the previous posters here who, as they've admitted, haven't actually sat on a jury themselves to find out. After the case in which the defendant changed his plea, we were told we had to come back the next day and be available to be called for another case if needed. I was called again, but this time challenged when my arse was about 3” off the seat on the way down! The other prospective jurors seemed to find this amusing – bastards.

A few months ago I spent a whole day in court as a supporter for someone, and saw lots and lots of traffic cases go through, and a couple of non-traffic ones. Some 1st time offenders and some repeat offenders. I was impressed with the judge’s handling of them all. A couple got let off very lightly, a couple got quite harsh penalties, and the rest were all somewhere in between. He was very consistent, in as much as the more history of offending the defendant had the harsher the punishment was. I felt they all deserved what they got, whether heavy or light.

[Ender EnZed]

Yes. I generally have a lot of time for judges.

Except for the old cunt who sentenced me more harshly for riding my motorbike while suspended on demerit points than he sentenced the drunk driver who came before me. Fair cop and all that, but the relative penalties (I got the same 6-month DQ, but a bigger fine) boggled me.

An eternal mystery, and a reminder of the occasionally arbitrary nature of our justice system.

It's not necessarily all that arbitrary. If you were the repeat offender (which you were) and it was drunky's first offence (which it might've been) then it makes sense that you need more deterring than just some more months disqualified. If drunky was losing his licence for the first time then that might be all that was needed to turn him into a model citizen.


He was very consistent, in as much as the more history of offending the defendant had the harsher the punishment was.

This. ^^^

[jrandom]

It's not necessarily all that arbitrary. If you were the repeat offender (which you were)

No, it was my first offence. You're confusing it with 'driving while disqualified'. I was just suspended on demerit points, which is different. Never been in the dock before.

And I can still be a cop or an army officer if I want to apply, unlike that drunk driver.

Yet, the judge's whole affect toward me was noticeably more negative and aggressive.

*shrug*

Must've been the lycra.

[Gremlin]

Must've been the lycra.
Nobody likes to see lycra in buildings :facepalm:

It's like togs and undies...

[Swoop]

Having been called on quite a few cases, the approach of "biker look" does not always work. A fellow in cordura, white helmet, etc, etc made a big show of picking up all his gear and headed for the jury seats, only having to find a place to stow all the stuff and sit down. Rather entertaining really. A suit will sometimes get you off as well, but really depends on the lawyers who are challenging (aren't ALL lawyers challenging?:whistle:) the prospective juror.


I have never been called.
I often wonder if Jury's are just compiled of unemployed.
I can completely assure you that this is not the case.

[rastuscat]

The Urewera terrorism trial is an interesting case.

Estimated to take 3 months. How may gainfully employed people can afford to put their lives and jobs on hold for 3 months to sit on a jury? I totally agree that it's a civic duty, and I'd do it if I weren't excluded (Popo), but it must be bloody difficult to organise.

[oneofsix]

The Urewera terrorism trial is an interesting case.

Estimated to take 3 months. How may gainfully employed people can afford to put their lives and jobs on hold for 3 months to sit on a jury? I totally agree that it's a civic duty, and I'd do it if I weren't excluded (Popo), but it must be bloody difficult to organise.

yeah. If your employer decides to keep paying your wages helps, but if you have to take the jury allowance it would really hurt a lot. And that doesn't touch the family crisis, one jurer already released due to a death in the family or something. Just getting your kids set up for the new school year is more than enough for most. I guess Jury is not like work where you can take 5 to sort out an urgent family matter, been called a few times but always challenged :woohoo:.

[Flip]

I was recently called up. My wanganui record has "known gang associate" because of my family and it did not get me off.

After being on one I have a lot of faih in the legal court system now. The jury I was on had a lot of technical information to get through and did so in a very professional manner.

I think everybody should do Jury service if they can, I was lucky as my employer at the time paid me to go.