New California Law Aims To Diversify Juries, Adds Tax Filers To Pool Of Potential Jurors

KPIX ^ | September 29, 2020

[artichokegrower]

California is expanding the pool of prospective jurors beyond those with driver’s licenses and the voter rolls, under new legislation signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The governor this week signed Senate Bill 592 by State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), which has been dubbed the “Fair Juries Act.” Under SB592, jury commissioners across California would be required to include anyone who files state taxes along with DMV records and lists of registered voters.

[artichokegrower]

According to Wiener’s office, using only DMV and voter lists to find potential jurors makes juries disproportionately whiter and wealthier than the community as a whole.

Those damn socially responsible white people. Anyhow if they want to diversify the jury pool they will need to use the welfare and delinquent child support rolls.

[EEGator]

You forgot D.O.C. records.

[Tench_Coxe]

They’re trying to rig juries.

[cherry]

if they think they’re going to get “diversity” from tax filers, they better think again.

[cherry]

if they think they’re going to get “diversity” from tax filers, they better think again.

[.44 Special]

Say Hey, Judge. Why doncha just drag peeps off’n da street. You know, impress them into jury service. Don’t mean nuffin no how.
You a judge? You don’t need no jury.
You can turn em loose or make em guilty, what ever. This Cali, ain’t it?

[originalbuckeye]

Just what CA needs....more juries like the OJ jury that let off a murderer.

[bert]

All black California jurors will vote to achieve tha political end to which they have been instructed

A black juror will never convict for political corruption

[Mouton]

Yeah, cannot wait for the first jury of tax filers. Of course it will be loaded up with those who use the tax system as a secondary welfare benefit for the various credits given. Most of the people serving on jury duty now could not even pass a simple high school achievement test of the 50s.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

They obviously have no clue about how *lawyers* and *judges* fill juries. They can eliminate jurors based on all sorts of reasons, or none at all. This is why certain groups get into jury pools, but never get accepted as jurors.

Regular exclusions:

1) Well educated.
2) Former police and military officers.
3) Law degree or former lawyer/paralegal.
4) Has a job associated with conservatism.
5) Lawyer’s prejudices.
6) People who are not fixated by shiny things.

[Mr. Jeeves]

Trump could do a lot of good by giving a major speech explaining the concept of jury nullification - how it has been upheld by the Supreme Court on at least three different occasions and and why all jurors need to go into trials fully informed about their true rights and powers.

The corrupt judges and Soros DA's could be largely neutralized with that one blow.

[Myrddin]

As an employee of a company with a presence in every US state, I often get called out to work outside my state of residence. The hours I work are tracked by zip code. When I pass a threshold, I'm compelled to pay state income tax to the state where the work was performed. In recent years, that meant filing in my home state of ID and in California and Nebraska. The CA and NE are non-resident state income tax filing. There is no way I'm going to agree to being subject to jury service in CA as an Idaho resident. As usual, you find California getting the "wiener" from that mentally defective excuse for a senator.

[Myrddin]

I was sitting in a jury pool for a drunk driving case. The defense lawyer was trying to make the case that the gas chromatography equipment used to assay blood alcohol was inaccurate. When he asked me, I honestly told him I used that kind of equipment in my college chemistry class and it was far more accurate than what he was claiming. Not to mention being LDS, having 5 members of my high school class killed by drunk drivers and having experience with growing up in a household with father who regularly drinks to excess.

I was dismissed from the pool...along with everyone else after I eviscerated the lie about the equipment. Subsequently, the results of the trial were made public. The defendant had a 0.24 BAC. He was bouncing off the left and right guard rails of a 3 lane freeway at 2:30 AM. The guy was an aide to a local city council member. Convicted on the charges.

[hanamizu]

“...more juries like the OJ jury that let off a murderer.”

---

Yes they did. But to be fair to the jury involved, the L.A.P.D. had a reputation in the ‘community’ for planting of evidence. And it turned out to be based on fact A few years later the city had to free and compensate over 100 criminals because the police in the Rampart division had planted evidence to enhance the charges against them. People were convinced the incriminating gloves were planted evidence.

[Vaduz]

Welfare and delinquent child support roll

Spot on movie stars don’t do courts.

[MarineBrat]

They call me “The Hangin’ Jurist!”

[packrat35]

No, they were NEVER going to convict him, no matter what!

[hanamizu]

No, they were NEVER going to convict him, no matter what!

---

I tend to agree. The case was obvious, but the actual evidence was on the light side. But L.A.P.D. claimed that they entered OJ’s grounds “to warn him that he might be a target” when it is common knowledge that partners, spouses, ex-spouses are always considered suspects.

Had O.J. been found with knife in hand (the knife has never been found, has it?) clothing covered in the victims’ blood (the clothing also has never turned up) a juror or two may well have voted not guilty, but not all of them.

It was not an air-tight case and given the ‘community’s’ animosity towards the police, I can at least understand how the jury voted as it did. At the time, like most, I was dumbfounded by the verdict, but with the exposure of L.A.P.D. dark side, I at least understand it.

[Arones]

2) Former police and military officers.

I've been on two juries in the last 6 years.

n=1

[Bikkuri]

"They’re trying to rig juries."

They did that back in 1995 (I think it was '95; OJ).