Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Jury Duty

I have to admit, it really wasn't bad. It wasn't even really boring. I'm sure it was a fate worse than death to many of the other jurors, but it really gave me a good opportunity to understand what you have to do as an attorney to convince the jury of your position.

The most important thing I learned, and the most disheartening thing as an attorney, is that the jurors don't give a flying crap about the law. Overall, the consensus amongst the other jurors was to do what was "right," which in this case was to return possession of an apartment to a landlord who hadn't been paid in two years. No matter how much I argued that the landlord did not do what it had to under the law, it fell upon deaf ears. In the end I was the sole dissenting juror.

On the bright side, defense counsel can hopefully get the verdict overturned post-trial precisely because jurors did not follow the law. Thank god for that rule. But in the future, I will remember that more than proving your case, all you really have to do is give the jury one good reason to vote for you.

Sorry for the little legal digression, this has been killing me since I finished jury duty last week. Definitely a memorable experience.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

That's why lawyers rarely serve on juries. Your lens is too narrow to see the big picture. In reality, a jury of peers can see what's right when the law doesn't work. Sometimes it works in reverse, though.