Posted on 04/25/2003 6:36:04 PM PDT by FourPeas
Jail term won't alter juror's defiant attitude Friday, April 25, 2003By Barton Deiters and Doug Guthrie
Every day, defendants leave the downtown court building to head to jail, but Thursday, it was a juror who went to the county lockup. Brian Scott Lett, a 23-year-old Alto resident who failed to show up for jury duty earlier this month, was hauled before Kent County Circuit Judge Donald Johnston Thursday and found in contempt of court. Lett was handcuffed and taken to Kent County Jail, where he remains today. Lett failed to show up for three consecutive days of jury duty starting April 7, then left an obscenity-laced response on the court's answering machine, using the F-word to indicate that he had no intention of serving on a jury. Johnston said when Lett came to court Thursday, he was abrasive and unrepentant. "Basically, he said he was too busy to be bothered with jury duty, and he just had a terrible attitude," said Johnston, who said this was the first time he could remember locking up a potential juror for contempt in his 24 years on the bench. "This was the most egregious example of the complete reverse of a sense of civic responsibility." Johnston said the three-day sentence is largely symbolic -- he could have sentenced Lett to 30 days -- but he hopes the Lowell High School graduate gets the message after his anger passes. But at least as of Thursday night, Lett had not cooled down. "I brought money expecting to pay a fine. I never thought I'd end up in jail," Lett said from jail. "It's unfair that they are locking someone up and keeping them from their work because the judge had a bad day." He said he could not show up because he had no car and it would have cost him $40 to take a cab. He also had to care for his 1-year-old daughter and did not want to miss time at his maintenance job. Lett's name was called, along with about 100 other Kent County residents, to report for duty at the Kent County Courthouse April 7-9. When jurors fail to show up for court-appointed duty and court workers cannot reach them by phone to discover the reason for their absence, an order is issued for them to appear before a judge. The judge then is the one asking the questions at a show-cause hearing. "Typically, the judge makes arrangements at the show cause for the person to serve and it's over," Circuit Court Administrator Kim Foster said. "There may be a fine here and there, but jail time is rare." Johnston said he has chewed people out from the bench who did not show up and also given out fines. Lett responded to written and telephone inquiries with two calls to the court, according to Circuit Court Jury Clerk Gail VanTimmeren. Lett originally responded by leaving an obscenity-laced message on VanTimmeren's voice-mail. "We are willing to consider some reasonable requests for exclusion from jury duty, but we don't consider, '(Expletive) jury duty, bitch,' a statement we can work with," VanTimmeren said. "We always try to be very solicitous," VanTimmeren added. "His responses were rather nasty. He was reached at his job and he said, 'I'm not coming in.'" Lett claims he had no idea that his statement was being taped and he did not mean to direct the comment at anyone in particular. VanTimmeren, who has served as jury clerk for eight years, said most people are hesitant about jury service at first. "I've had so many tell me there weren't interested in duty until they did it," she said. "At the very least, they say it was interesting. They get a taste of government they haven't had since high school civics class. There's usually a sense of pride when they finish." Johnston said he hoped Lett would learn the importance of jury duty -- a civic responsibility people have fought and died for. "I hope next time he is called, he'll show up 15 minutes early," he said. But Lett is not making the honor roll in this particular civics lesson. He said he would refuse to eat the "nasty" food in jail while he is there through Saturday. He also said he had no intention of serving on a jury. "Next time, I'm going to tell them I'm a racist mother------ and get out of it that way," Lett said.
The Grand Rapids Press
And since you mention it, it's a lot like retail, and there ARE nasty sales clerks that don't get fired. In our local market the retail stores are hurting for employees, and you could complain all day but they can't afford to fire a rude sales clerk. You can't extrapolate from that that ALL sales clerks are nasty because they know they can't be fired.
See also my later post that crossed with yours. This judge has never before thrown a venireman in jail for contempt in over ten years on the bench. Looks like your generalization doesn't apply here.
I wouldn't call it "slavery." It's a responsibility of Citizenship. While I'm sure that there are plenty of judges who get off on throwing their weight around, if he would have politely presented his case, he would most likely not have wound up in jail. I have been called to jury duty twice. The first time, I was away at school, and somehow, the post office screwed up with the mail forwarding, and I wasn't aware of it until a county sherrif showed up at my aunt's doorstep! There was a warrant out for my arrest for contempt. It was cleared up quickly with a letter from the registrar. The second time was just a few years ago. Due to my job as an instructor, I was not able to take time off for jury duty without advance notice, and I took a letter from my boss, as well as my teaching schedule and list of certifications to the judge, and he allowed me to reschedule my jury duty for 3 months later. I wound up sitting in the jury pool for 2 days, and only made it to a selection room once.
Pretty boring. But, it was my civic duty.
One thing that I've given a lot of thought to lately is how the leftists are trying to make citizenship a right of everyone, with no responsibilities. Things like giving illegal aliens reduced tuition and government services. Again, there are responsibilities that go along with citizenship, and one of the most important is jury duty.
Mark
People like the guy in the article "go off" on a lot of things.
I notice there was no wife mentioned in the article. He probably "went off" on her and she got a belly full of it.
Some people go through life pissed off about everything; it's a shame to see it in a 23-year old.
The judge did a very good thing and may have saved somebody's life.
My generalization was not specific to this situation, although nothing I have seen so far tells me it does not fit.
The facts are, we don't know how this guy was treated. I'm inclined to think - as I am sure you can see - that he was not treated well. I base this on every experience I have had dealing with courthouse employees. You have to treat them gingerly, coax them, coddle them to get them to do their jobs. Not one of them approaches service with even the most remote amount of enthusiasm. Just once - no, I take that back, all the time - I would like them to do their jobs like professionals without me having to go through all sorts of games to get what I need out of them.
I'm also certain at this point that we agree more than we don't - but it sure is fun to debate on here, isn't it.
Okay, I've gotten all the way through many posts without a lawyer joke so we better stop. Btw, I'm quite certain I have a few you have not heard. Best Regards, BJN
You were a part of a larger jury pool, which counties call up to be sure they have enough qualified citizens willing and able to perform their civic duties. Do you seriously think anyone sneaked around the room and investigated what each potential juror was holding and reading?
LOL. No, I had made reference to people resenting notices for jury duty in a post to you a couple of weeks ago.
Part of the reason some clerks are surly, of course, is that they have to deal with lawyers all day. :-D And Atlanta lawyers, I'm afraid, have a tendency to get all above themselves and look down their noses at the outlying Georgia counties. So I was trying to defuse any hostility that might arise from my status as one of those "City Slickers" . . . as well as just engaging in the usual litigator's practice of playing every possible angle.
True story: When my dad was still trying cases (he's retired - he was in active practice for 50 years) he went to trial one time before a judge who was a big Georgia Bulldogs fan. After some thought, he selected a red and black tie. His associate asked, "Should I wear one too?" Dad thought some more, then decided, "No. Too obvious."
Your logic is faulty. The Constitution addresses the right of a defendent to a jury trial - it does NOT say a free citizen may be detained and forced to serve on a jury.
Seems to me that forcing an unwilling juror to sit in the box is a bad idea for upholding justice. Can you say "nullification"?
And, by the way, I've served on a jury. Whether or not I'll do so again in the future depends on the circumstances at the time. I've got 14 jobs depending on me right now, so at the moment the answer is no.
If everyone could opt out, then that could not be ensured.
Look, one of the easiest ways of seeing what the founders meant in the words they put out is by seeing how they acted. It's a great way of seeing that they meant the second amendment to be an individual right (just like the others). And it is also a great way to see that they thought the idea of conscripting juries was a-o-k.
In other words, slavery hasn't been fully repealed since the days of the founders? Government, but no longer individuals, is entitled to be a slaveholder?
No. But many of them deserve it, especially from the citizens who have invested in them the power they have so often abused.
Ah, well, at least we see that YOU have the courage of your convictions, eh, counselor?
Does the word "hypocrite" have ANY meaning for you?
Kunta Kinte did fine when he played up to the "Massa" as well!
Suck up to your local tyrants! It's the American Way!(R)
Ah, so next time you're in trouble with the law, I'm sure you'll ask for a bench trial, so as not to enslave your fellow Sovereign CitizensTM?
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.