U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-30-2011, 07:55 AM
 
403 posts, read 517,819 times
Reputation: 265

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
Oh never mind virgode, I see what you are saying now.

You thought I was saying you DID agree with her getting special treatment, which is not what I was saying at all.



Because if they rush to a hasty decision, they will suffer much of the same backlash as the CA jurors are suffering right now. Basicly, I'm saying that if a juror knows his/her name will be made public, it may be incentive to do the job right instead of rushing to a hasty decision because they don't really want to be there. { again, not referring to CA jury }

I think it's only fair to know how much of my tax dollars are going towards your salary.
in other words, you want peer pressure to force the jurors to come to the decision that the PUBLIC wants. NOT what they feel is warranted based on the evidence presented. Quite frankly, the jurors came to the right decisn. The prosecution overcharged Casey without the evidence to prove those charges. They were just so convinced that the jury would be swayed by emotion and by the public sentiment that a conviction would be easy. Not the case at all.


You also have failed to address the secrecy applied for grand jury proceedings. That's still under the purview of tax dollars. In addition, the rules of evidence are not applicable. Grand juries are known for simply going along with what the prosecution wants and handing out indictments. If that can be kept secret and justice still be served, then regular jury names can be kept secret as well. You have yet to present a valid argument for why the names should be released.


The argument about policy also makes absolutely no sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-30-2011, 08:01 AM
 
403 posts, read 517,819 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
Point well taken^^, but FOIA means it is public information. That won't change. Nor should it, transparency is part of democracy.
Why can't people come with a better argument than, "well it's public information!" Okay so what? That doesn't mean it SHOULD be public information. It is absolutely idiotic to think that the same rules should apply to every single case when so many factors come into play. Juror safety should be paramount. People already hate serving jury duty. The court could help with that by giving them privacy so they won't have to worry about retaliation. Heck, narcs are still able to testify while wearing hoods or sitting behind screens to protect their safety. Why shouldn't citizens be afforded that same measure of protection? They don't CHOOSE to it on these juries. The narcs CHOSE that line of work.

Oh and since we aren't really in a democracy, the transparency argument doesn't fly well in that regard either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 09:55 AM
 
Location: Ohio
13,900 posts, read 10,796,204 times
Reputation: 7242
Quote:
Originally Posted by deepimpact2 View Post
in other words, you want peer pressure to force the jurors to come to the decision that the PUBLIC wants. NOT what they feel is warranted based on the evidence presented. Quite frankly, the jurors came to the right decisn. The prosecution overcharged Casey without the evidence to prove those charges. They were just so convinced that the jury would be swayed by emotion and by the public sentiment that a conviction would be easy. Not the case at all.
As I said, I'm not referring to the CA jury but juries in general.

Quote:
You also have failed to address the secrecy applied for grand jury proceedings. That's still under the purview of tax dollars. In addition, the rules of evidence are not applicable. Grand juries are known for simply going along with what the prosecution wants and handing out indictments. If that can be kept secret and justice still be served, then regular jury names can be kept secret as well. You have yet to present a valid argument for why the names should be released.
Oh but I have..... policy dictates that they be made public and that is good enough reason. If you don't like that policy or think it should be changed, fine. Take it up with your legislature.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
Point well taken^^, but FOIA means it is public information. That won't change. Nor should it, transparency is part of democracy.
Actualy J12, the court system isn't covered under FOIA

Juror Information and Public Records - Lawyers.com

{ link courtesy of Virgode, who's Ignore list I am now apparently on }

Quote:
Some courts have addressed the issue of whether people have a right to see judicial records. This right is not based on the federal Freedom of Information Act because it doesn't apply to courts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
Well, hopefully people have more productive things to do than stalk CA jurors. And heaven forbid anyone from being a zealot and making an example out of these people. But it would be a situation like that to create change, we are a reactive society, not proactive.
Spot on j12!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by virgode View Post
Are you kidding me? We've been thru this "oh nevermind I see what you are saying.

No anger issue here...somethings got to wake you up.

Do me a favor...put me on your ignore list and don't reply to my posts and I'll do then same.



I never understood why people put others on "ignore" when they have disagreements...... what are they here for in the first place???? This would be a pretty dull forum if we all just put each other on ignore and only talked to others who had the same viewpoints as ourselves.....

I'm not putting you on ignore virgode
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 03:26 PM
 
Location: Native Floridian, USA
4,907 posts, read 6,124,428 times
Reputation: 6117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
All the information they want eh?

Interesting concept. My current occupation is in civil service, and of course tax payer funded. How much information do you feel you have a right to know about me? Name? Address? Date of birth? Bank account information? How many rooms are in my house? What kind of car I drive? How many times a week my girlfriend and I have sex?

Where do you draw the line?
At basic information, of course. I am a notary and all of my information is accessible online. Am I happy about it, no, but if I want to be a notary public my info is public information.

We are headed down a slippery slope if we want to start making things private in regards to things that happen that are funded by the government (aka, the people), peers drawn from the general public and their decisions can effect the public good....JMO. It ain't perfect...the system but, I like the appearance of openness anyway. Too much is hidden behind closed doors, too......that is why we have Sunshine Laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2011, 08:31 AM
 
52,032 posts, read 41,851,918 times
Reputation: 32463
If I were one of those jurors i would strongly consider applying for a concealed carry permit and maybe buying a bullet proof vest. Some REALLY crazy folks out there.....

Maybe the next thread in the true crime section will be some early-onset dementia gal hopped up on watching too much Nancy Grace hearing voices from their cats....that went after someone related to the crime-du jour.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2011, 03:49 PM
 
25,905 posts, read 39,198,746 times
Reputation: 13903
I don't know, if these jurors had used common sense nobody would have been so outraged!

It would at least be a hang jury, not this!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2011, 04:10 PM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
13,943 posts, read 19,169,679 times
Reputation: 9175
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee View Post
I don't know, if these jurors had given us the verdict we wanted, there would no outrage!
Fixed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2011, 04:13 PM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
13,943 posts, read 19,169,679 times
Reputation: 9175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
If I were one of those jurors i would strongly consider applying for a concealed carry permit and maybe buying a bullet proof vest. Some REALLY crazy folks out there.....

Maybe the next thread in the true crime section will be some early-onset dementia gal hopped up on watching too much Nancy Grace hearing voices from their cats....that went after someone related to the crime-du jour.
Speaking of which, what was the cackling demon's reaction to the juror's names being released? I was going to tune in just to see, but I can tolerate her ignorance in small doses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2011, 06:06 PM
 
17,004 posts, read 20,701,668 times
Reputation: 33994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unique27 View Post
I don't really see a point of them releasing the names..
Because it's Flori-duh.

How many fistfights broke out(which was really disgusting behavior) over seating during the trial before they wised up and did something about it.

People acting like they were on line to see Oprah or a rock concert when they're attending a trial in which a child was murdered.

In other states they would have held a lottery, only those who have a ticket will get a seat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2011, 06:07 PM
 
9,916 posts, read 9,311,269 times
Reputation: 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnieA View Post
At basic information, of course. I am a notary and all of my information is accessible online. Am I happy about it, no, but if I want to be a notary public my info is public information.
I am a Notary Public and have been since 1969. But I don't have any info online. When I received my appointment by the Governor it was a lifetime thing. Over the years our state changed and now the appointments have a ten year period. The only record on me is in our Secretary of State's office probably in a file cabinet on a yellowed piece of paper or thermal copy paper.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top