Posted on 04/06/2011 7:14:11 AM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
There are people here calling for the judge to be tarred and feathered. Explain again, what sanction is she under? How is she being punished?
As to if they are her views (apparently shared by some here) than she is a stupid bitch and a few days sitting around the courthouse after a tongue lashing by the judge may give her time to reflect on those views.
If she said those things just to avoid service, she failed miserably.
Either way, I'm perfectly comfortable with the outcome. I stand by the judge.
“Which could backfire when the juror automatically votes guilty when a black is a defendant.”
Exactly - This judge has just set himself up for a mistrial and a waste of taxpayer money if this juror is on a jury. Contrary to what he thinks he can’t create justice by forcing this person to serve or to lie. It isn’t against the law yet to think that one does not respect certain ethnic groups, although I’m certain that the SPLC and others that they pal with would like to make it happen.
I guess that narrows it down a bit...
“ONLY WHITES CAN BE RACIST”
LOL - I have no idea of the ethnicity of this individual, but there is a legitimate case to be made that anglo white gentiles are probably the most discriminated against and under-represented group in the halls of power in the USA, and the absurdity and unfairness is they are the most likely to be accused of racism.
What law did the judge make up? What sanction did he impose?
The best way to address this without stepping on toes is to say .....”Judge - I want to serve on this jury because I can spot a guilty person from a mile away.”
For forcing her to do it indefinately
Are the other hundred or so people sitting along side of her as part of jury panels also being confined and deprived of their livelihood?
Try reading the homework assignment before coming to class.
You want to know the real unfairness and absurdity of it?
They're the ones who first told the world slavery and racism were wrong. The rest of the world kept right on practicing both to this day, and the people who tried to end it, are the ones who most bear the brunt of their own moral stance.
We have millions of people breaking down the border gates across the entire West, trying to get in and live among those they call racist oppressors. And those of Euro-descent can't self-flagellate enough.It's utter madness.
People assigned to a jury are there 'indefinitely' as well. A trial can last a day, a week, a month or longer. Sometimes, juries are sequestered and they are cut off from contact with the outside world. So what's your point? What's her hardship that others perfectly willing to do their duty are not enduring?
Why the hell do you have even a shred of sympathy for this woman bitch?
So the couthouse is now a reeducation camp? Do people not have a right to think as they wish in this country?
That the jury questionnaire is a mockery of the "jury of peers" concept.
The rejection of the "scientifically" chosen jury.
A contempt for the egalitarian notion that the feeble minded and the terminally ignorant have a place an ANY jury.
Belief in jury nullification and its application where justice demands it.
The insult that an informed prospective juror must not serve on any jury.
The asinine concept of change of venue.
I was neutral on the subject of jury service, until I realized how thoroughly the legal profession, including judges, has perverted the outcome of the jury system.
Ego stroking? I don't think so. She is being made an example that attempting to game the system will not get the result people expect.
I'd say we should have more of this and that people should take jury duty seriously. Perhaps it does happen more often. Probably the only reason we heard of this one is that it is a very high profile capital murder trial and that the judge decided to give her a public rebuke and publicized his decision to throw her back in the pool rather than cutting her lose.
Maybe judges do it frequently with just a note to the bailiff to take her back and put her in another pool.
“People assigned to a jury are there ‘indefinitely’ as well”
No, they are there for the term of the trial.
“Why the hell do you have even a shred of sympathy for this woman bitch?”
She’s had puppies? You know nothing about her and yet you feel able to reach judgment on her. You are assuming based on a short article.
Perhaps you like activist judges who create their own laws and forms of punishment.
The trouble with that is there would be no standards whatsoever. The current PC Egalitanianism.
The feebleminded, the wilfully ignorant, folks with a tribal mentality, criminals not yet caught and people who don't have a minimal grasp of the English language.
You really think that would be an improvement?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.