The AARP has put out a short informative article, titled How to Recognize a Robocall, that is worth paying attention to. It discusses four major fraudulent calls most of us are repeatedly getting, especially older adults, whom the scammers deem easy targets. Those calls relate to health insurance, missed jury duty, Social Security being cut off, and a request the person supposedly made to alleviate their pain. Read this article, be aware, and make sure your older loved ones are vigilant when answering the phone.
Tag Archive for jury
Deadly Racism Approved by Supreme Court
There are two types of black people—”regular black folks” and “***gers” was the expressed belief of a juror deciding in favor of the death penalty for Black defendant Keith Tharp. Lower courts wouldn’t handle the hot potato appeals. Then it went to the Supreme Court–and they refused to hear the case, too! So Tharp awaits execution.
We’re supposed to be judged by a fair and impartial jury. If you were____ (insert your race or nationality) on trial for your life, how would you feel about a juror who was obviously and vocally prejudiced against your race or nationality and influencing the other jurors? Would you feel you were being judged fairly and impartially?
Think about that as you read what happened to Tharp, and, consequently, to our justice system. Read The Supreme Court Won’t Hear the Case of an Inmate Sentenced to Death by Racist Juror.
Getting Out of Being on a Jury
How can I get out of it?!
That’s a common first reaction when someone opens a notice to appear for jury duty. After all, we figure, aren’t we told “Judge not, lest you be judged”? Does that mean, though, that we should leave a person’s future in the hands of those who actually resent being there or feel they have nothing better to do? Would we want them to pass judgment on us or on our loved one accused of a crime? We’ve been given intelligence and compassion, which we should use to fight inequality, manipulation, discrimination, and exploitation—all of which often appear in our good, yet flawed, justice system.
It takes only one individual to lead the rest of the jurors to the truth of “guilty” or “not guilty.” If you aren’t there, who will stand up for the American principle of a truly fair and just trial?
In Danger for Sticking by her Conscience
One woman is receiving threats and has to have security because she refused to cave in. She was the only one who stuck to her “no” vote on whether to execute Jodi Arias. It wasn’t a religious decision or that she was opposed to the death penalty. We have to believe her on that; lawyers put prospective jurors through rigorous questioning to disqualify such people. Rather, there was something nagging at her conscience, making her unsure that death was appropriate in this case.
And she wasn’t the only one. Four members of the original jury also refused to vote for death for Arias. And those jurors heard the entire case, not an abridged version of it, as this last jury did.
Putting a human being to death is a very serious decision to make. That’s why it must be unanimous. And why we must respect the people who have enough doubt to vote against it.
What would have happened if the original four and this one woman had been replaced with others? Would they have interpreted facts differently? Would they have felt that doubt but, nonetheless, been influenced to vote with the majority? Would that have been any more just than the real outcome?
There are too many uncontrollable factors going into jury selection, and a judge alone should not make the determination. This, in itself, should be reason enough to eliminate the death penalty in America.
Manipulating Guilt and Innocence
Think about who you would believe. First, there’s a person whose TV and newspaper pictures show in various scenes: in a graduation gown, with earphones doing everyday things, and among friends and family. The other is shown alone, no family or friends around him, coming out of a police station or simply facing forward, almost in mug-shot pose except for the lack of numbers across his chest. You see these pictures again and again. Unconsciously, if you’re like most people, you want to side with the everyday guy. Especially if he’s a kid and the other guy is a cop. Add in the details that the kid is Black and the cop works for a police force with a bad record of treatment toward Blacks.
That’s what we’ve been seeing. And that’s the way the media typically presents situations, deciding which side to present in a better light. Then we wonder why people get upset and riot when the media bad-guy doesn’t get what we think he deserves.
I don’t know if Officer Wilson was criminally wrong. Nobody knows for sure. Only the grand jury has seen most of the evidence. And they didn’t clear Wilson of any wrongdoing; they only said there wasn’t enough evidence to bring him to trial. I know only that the media, which has a duty to be unbiased and has failed that duty–is partly to blame for the damage, destruction, and disrupted lives due to the current riots and all other riots they’ve manipulated us into.
Jury Duty–Duck it?
People keep telling me I’m crazy because I’m sticking by my phone this week, on-call for jury duty. They joke about the excuses they’ve gotten away with to get out of serving and point out that I actually have several very valid reasons. So why don’t I duck the duty?
I’m willing to sit through long, draw-out lawyers’ talks and questionable evidence because that’s what I’d want other rational people to do if I or one of my loved ones were on trial. I fancy myself a caring, reasonable, thoughtful, logical person. That’s who I’d want judging me or mine. If everyone who has those characteristics were to duck jury duty, where does that leave our already-infirm judicial system and the accused people caught up in it?
To me, jury duty is my obligation, both to my society and to those on trial.