Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jail term won't alter juror's defiant attitude [amazing stupidity]
Grand Rapids Press ^ | Friday, April 25, 2003 | Barton Deiters and Doug Guthrie

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
The Grand Rapids Press


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.



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: civicduty; contempt; juryduty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-203 next last
To: Beelzebubba
"Uh-huh. Do you habitually tell judges to go **** themselves?"

No. But many of them deserve it, especially from the citizens who have invested in them the power they have so often abused.

You hold the jury and legal system in such low esteem and yet you work within that system yourself. You applaud others when they berate the system to the face of a judge and yet, when faced with the same situation, you don't have the courage of your convictions to do the same. Maybe "hypocrite" doesn't exactly fit the description ... does "coward" or "blood-sucking parasite" come closer?

If you participate in the system and don't expose your true feelings to it, that makes you a hypocrite. You can say "Oh, I'm trying to change the system from within" but, unless you take the stand and put yourself at odds with it, you are playing a game of mental masturbation, satisfying yourself but producing nothing useful.

If the judges or "corrupt lawyers" deserve to be treated with contempt, and you do not do so .. to their faces and in their courtrooms .. then you are not fighting for anyone's freedom, merely the coin of the realm that allows you to exist.

Doesn't that spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-s-y to you?

161 posted on 04/28/2003 9:47:50 AM PDT by BlueLancer (Der Elite Møøsenspåånkængruppen ØberKømmååndø (EMØØK))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Hoppean
The reason the TV was on Rosie is the fact that it is the favorate show of most people that actually end up serving on juries. Thus we get the O.J. juries and the Billion dollar awards for spilling coffee.
162 posted on 04/28/2003 10:13:48 AM PDT by helper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Becki
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 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."

You have been all over this thread saying this guy was jailed for not serving jury duty, or, as you put it, not submitting to slavery. That is not correct. He was jailed for contempt.

Dear Becki:

What do you think contempt is? It is the failure to comply with an order of court.

Please do your homework before spouting off...or just follow the lead of friendly and his buddies and stick to making ridiculous comments.

163 posted on 04/28/2003 10:23:21 AM PDT by ContemptofCourt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: ContemptofCourt
What do you think contempt is? It is the failure to comply with an order of court.

Please do your homework before spouting off...or just follow the lead of friendly and his buddies and stick to making ridiculous comments.

My, my. Aren't you a pleasant fellow! Pleased to make your aquaintance.

As to not compying with a court order, do you know the order he did not comply with? It was not jury duty; this judge has never jailed anyone for that before. Do you think it could possibly have been foul language, yelling in the courtroom, failure to calm himself and comport himself is a reasonable manor?

As for doing my homework, I live in the Grand Rapids area. It was a local interest story.

Have a good one!!

Becki

164 posted on 04/28/2003 11:04:56 AM PDT by Becki (Pray continually for our leaders and our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Becki
Dearest Becki:

Please pay attention....jury duty is court ordered....he was then summoned to a "rule to show cause" hearing...this is a hearing in which the judge asks the person in contempt of the original order to show cause why he or she should not be held in contempt. It was then, at this hearing, that he mouthed off to the judge.

The fact that the judge had never jailed someone before probably means that the judge is a pretty even-keeled guy.

Of course, the moral to this story is that you get more flies with honey.....

165 posted on 04/28/2003 11:10:06 AM PDT by ContemptofCourt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: patton
I got called for jury duty twice - when I was a private in the army, serving overseas. I was excused.

I got called once for federal jury duty. Turns out my ex-wife had clerked for the prosecutor in the case.

166 posted on 04/28/2003 11:23:34 AM PDT by dirtboy (Tagline under construction, fines doubled for speeding)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: ContemptofCourt
It was then, at this hearing, that he mouthed off to the judge.

Thank you! If you paid attention to my note, I do believe that is what I said. The argument made was that he was jailed for not serving jury duty. That was not correct. I pointed that out.

Of course, the moral to this story is that you get more flies with honey.....

You might want to try it sometime and see how well it works.

Becki

167 posted on 04/28/2003 11:24:37 AM PDT by Becki (Pray continually for our leaders and our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Becki
Good grief....he had an order to serve as a juror...he did not comply with the order...he appeared before the judge at a show cause hearing and could not show the judge a reason why he failed to comply with the order.

If he had complied with the order and served as a juror, he would not have gone to jail.

168 posted on 04/28/2003 11:45:02 AM PDT by ContemptofCourt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: ContemptofCourt
Of course if he had served he would not have gone to jail. The point is that in the just cause hearing, not having transportation or not being able to find care for a child are acceptable exemptions. It was not an inability to provide just cause that caused his jail time. It was an inability to behave in a civilized manner.

The context of the discussion was that the judge was pulling a power play on this guy over jury duty. That was a misrepresentation and changed the entire meaning of the jail sentence.

Take care.

Becki

169 posted on 04/28/2003 12:39:30 PM PDT by Becki (Pray continually for our leaders and our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Steel Wolf
Hmm, I am about as authoritarian as they come, but even I must admit that asking a guy living on the edge of a working class existance to take a day off from work and pay $80 for a cab is excessive. And we both know that he couldn't have simply phoned in and explain his situtation-- you have to go in in order to speak to a judge. He handled the situation poorly, and he got what he deserved, but I do understand his frustration.
170 posted on 04/28/2003 12:47:46 PM PDT by Under the Radar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DeFault User
I totally agree. We need to totally eliminate voir dire.
171 posted on 04/28/2003 1:24:18 PM PDT by Henrietta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: All
I can't believe some of the comments here, I thought the people
on this forum believed in our form of Government and were ready and willing
to steup up to our Obligation to serve on Jury Duty.

What is the free republic coming to???We must have a bunch of Noobies or smart a$$es invading our forum
CD

172 posted on 04/28/2003 1:53:40 PM PDT by Coffee_drinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: dighton
Many years ago, my Dad told my brothers and I how to get out of jury duty in Detroit; just say you
think the n****** is guilty.

BTW I am waiting to get called of jury duty.
173 posted on 04/28/2003 2:29:02 PM PDT by Springman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba; John Lenin
Just to let you know, Michigan get its jury pool from driver license
regerations(sp?) not from the voter reg.
174 posted on 04/28/2003 2:35:13 PM PDT by Springman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: William McKinley
It is the duty of every citizen to support the Constitution and I am afraid that includes Jury Duty, if you loose a few bucks, that is the price of FReedom.

You could have a couple of retired, bored State employees judging you for the stipend, rather than a FReeborn citizen.

175 posted on 04/28/2003 2:45:30 PM PDT by Little Bill (No Rats, A.N.S.W.E.R (WWP) is a commie front!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Under the Radar
He did NOT "have to go in". What got him in the FIRST round of trouble was not showing up for jury duty and leaving nasty messages on the answering machine.

The jury summons shows up anywhere from 30-60 days before you actually have to go in and serve. That's when you send a letter to the jury clerk explaining why you cannot serve - somebody in a min. wage job who doesn't own a car and will be fired if he misses 5 days of work is probably going to be let off just with a letter to the jury clerk. Sometimes you can get your employer to drop the clerk a line - key man, can't spare him right now, put him over to the next term (or words to that effect).

And assuming he's illiterate to boot, there used to be notary public type folks in most poor neighborhoods who would handle stuff like this for people who don't know what to do -- usually the fellow who kept the general store or the local gas station. Failing that, he could ask his preacher (if he has one).

This idiot waited until he was actually SUPPOSED to be there, then probably replied to a telephone inquiry from a deputy clerk with the obscene phone call. That is utterly contemptuous, defiant, and stupid to boot. He dug himself into a great big hole, just by being ugly, when a few nice words and a short letter probably would have avoided the problem.

176 posted on 04/28/2003 2:51:36 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother (. . . there is nothing new under the sun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: helper
The reason the TV was on Rosie is the fact that it is the favorate show of most people that actually end up serving on juries. Thus we get the O.J. juries and the Billion dollar awards for spilling coffee.

That's true. It gets better, though. If I recall correctly, the particular Rosie show that I saw that day was one where she showed the audience a Barbie-Doll-brand toy of herself, one made in her image. The thing I found so hilarious about this was that the "Rosie Doll" was thin! Who are they fooling? The doll was nowhere close to being true to life because Rosie's a fat tub! Of course, the toy company had to make that decision since no one would want to buy or play with a doll of an obese woman. The liberals call this "sizeism." LOL!

177 posted on 04/28/2003 2:55:16 PM PDT by Hoppean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Hoppean
My father was a Realestate Attorney, one of his partners was the Criminal Attorney for the firm, and he told me when selecting a jury you wanted someone who didn't read the newspaper, watch the TV news, or have any strong opinions. Does that tell you anything. It used to be hard to get that in a jury, but not anymore.
178 posted on 04/28/2003 3:46:12 PM PDT by helper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Tall_Texan
I've never been a plaintiff or a defendant but, if I ever were, I'd want people who took the responsibility of jury service seriously when deciding my fate.

Amen!!!

179 posted on 04/28/2003 4:20:56 PM PDT by libravoter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin
The guy voted in an election, thats how they get your name for jury duty

You know, I am 31-years-old. I vote in every election (and primary . . . and run-off), I have a valid driver's license, have lived in the same town for five years, and yet have never ever been called for jury duty.

I'm beginning to think there's something about my views they don't like . . .

180 posted on 04/28/2003 4:24:02 PM PDT by libravoter ((and I'm beginning to feel like it's an exclusive club! Ooooo! Ooo! I want to be on a jury!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-203 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson