Jury Service.....

Went to court this morning, they weren't there - had already been and gone - whew! Got an excusal for the rest of the 2 weeks - Whew! Talked with a psychologist today, will follow up next week. Had a chance to catch up with some of the other jurors and am now feeling much better, i.e. a survivor not a victim.

Life will go on and I will be ok, eventually, sooner than later thanks to having talked with a professional and qualified counsellor/psych.

Thank you all for your support, greenies, stories, information and debates.

Oh, by the way, the vodka bottle is empty now :)

Cheers (hic)
Wendy
______________________________________
Strong people know when to get help. It's not a sign of wimpiness or weakness, but, I believe, IMHOP, one of strength. I have openly acknowledged that I needed help in hopes that others will obtain help if they ever need it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanP

Yeah, I regularly pick up some innocent off the streets and charge them just for the fun of it.

---

Its not personal Dan. No doubt you've had complainants who have alterior motives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanP

Precisely what I was saying. Most matters that costs may end up being awarded don't get to court. Remember that you only act for those who are going to court.

---

My point is that it would have to be a very very crappy case to have costs awarded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanP

That is, until thrown out on some bullshyte technicality.

---

I dont quite think that the Evidence Act is such a technicality. There are good reasons for each section being enacted and generally stem from prior mistakes where innocent people have been convicted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanP

That doesn't necessarily mean there isn't ample evidence. It just means that the defence have done their job and introduced enough confusion to put the matter in doubt.

---

Juries aren't that stupid in my experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanP

As I said, in the higher courts they are more likely to give a matter a run because of media and community pressure to do so.
Dan

---

That said, the tongue in cheek comment about them all being guilty cant be right then can it.:D

Dan I dont envy you and I certainly understand the frustrations you may feel. You remember how we first crossed paths.

We work on opposite sides of the fence, that is when I do the occasional criminal trial, and I am just airing the view from the other side.

DanP,

Gee, I thought there would be enough crooks up there to keep you busy without picking on the decent people.:D :D

You forgot to mention all the evidence that is with-held from the jury because of sleight of tongue from the liwyers; and the old "the jury don't need to hear those things, it might upset them" from the bench.

The poor old jury are treated like the proverbial mushrooms. They are only allowed to hear what those running the show want them to hear.

There is an old saying "Justice must be SEEN to be done." No mention of it having to be done. Just a lot of pomp & preening & strutting about by some overpaid egotists who think nothing of ruining the lives of decent people just to feather their own nest.

No wonder the general community have little or no faith in our legal system. And this hasn't touched on the victims being further victimised by the system as well as ridiculously lenient sentencing.

Over to you Danno.

I think I will now take my medication.
K.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toggy

You forgot to mention all the evidence that is with-held from the jury because of sleight of tongue from the liwyers; and the old "the jury don't need to hear those things, it might upset them" from the bench.

The poor old jury are treated like the proverbial mushrooms. They are only allowed to hear what those running the show want them to hear.

There is an old saying "Justice must be SEEN to be done." No mention of it having to be done. Just a lot of pomp & preening & strutting about by some overpaid egotists who think nothing of ruining the lives of decent people just to feather their own nest.

---

The old saying is that "not only must justice be done, but must also be seen to be done". That is why the jury doesnt hear about the time the defendant was 19 and involved in a pub brawl when his wife accuses him of rape. Its just not relevant to the matter at hand. There is nothing mysterious or secretive about what is going on in court.

Nothing like a bit of lawyer bashing is there. Good therapy I say.

I still dont understand why they are paid more than your average process worker. Time for me to go and preen my ego.......

Boban,

Not anti lawyer; there are some who over the years I have classed as friends. Not "close" friends because of different career paths. These people were above reproach and I very highly respected their honesty and their dedication to their clients. I in turn was always totally honest in my dealings with them.

There are a few police who I have come in contact with on different occassions who I have mistrusted extremely; but luckily over the years they have been dealt with by the judicial system, and quite rightly so. They may (or may not) have been dealt with more severely than a run of the mill criminal; but they deserved it. They gave their word to uphold the law; not break it.

If you or anyone else were in a mind to prove to me (no balance of probabilities here) of their honesty & high morals they too would gain my respect. Funnily enough I was once publicly taken to task by one of your compatriots for having too high a morals. I never thought such a thing was possible.

Good and bad in every profession. No reasonable doubt there.

Its good to question our systems of justice and their participants. I dont try to offend anyone here intentionally and I think, for most others on this forum, the same applies.

As long as Im not attacked personally, I take no offence to any comments which for the most part are generalisations and misconceptions about my profession. Most of it I find amusing.

I guess this is just one of those topics that I feel I can contribute to, albeit tainted with my own personal bias.

boban you know that most of your clients are guilty like dan said they dont get to court unless they are, the evidence act doesnt come into it at court everyone knows that magistrates are a law unto them selves and they can do what they like without any serious reprucussions. Ive seen alot of cases where costs were awarded and no they werent crappy cases. The system is set up for the police to fail and every opportunity for the poor defendant, in fairness to the defendant, how many times have I heard that. I too have met some great solicitors but the dribble that comes out of there mouth about their poor client is sickening, too many of these innocent people should stand up and take account for there actions.
solidarity reg(sorry dan)

I had a conversation with a duty solicitor (legal aid) one lunchtime in Melb Magistrates Court and he was telling me the most difficult aspect of his job was to put forward a glowing appraisal of his newfound client that is as original as the one he did 20 minutes earlier, and knowing that in another 20 minutes he will have to do another one.
That would have to be a challenge.
Is there a little book of repertoire that is used?;)

The lawyers and the cops will always be adversaries.

But thats not the problem.

When the bums are convicted and go off to jail they usually get out before they have served the full time bequeathed to them.

yeah there is, my client has had a troubled past and he's been a good boy for the last 15 minutes, he has a wife and kids and he's trying to get back on track, because most magistrates are now from a defence background its accepted, as can be seen in the media about lax sentencing.

He got 8 years jail, 10 years probation or was that a good behaviour bond, or was the 10 years how long he had to stay away from the man, girlfriend and her children for.

Now to close it and leave it.......


W

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rufflyrustic

Now to close it and leave it.......

---

Probably the wisest words that could be said!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rufflyrustic

Now to close it and leave it.......

---

Exactly, its not your fault he did what he did, in fact, its his fault you had to go through this. You took your responsibility seriously, to your credit, but its over for you now. rest assured that if someone else was sitting in your seat the outcome would still have been the same. he will probably do about 2 years of his 8 year sentence, the victims will still be suffering when he is released. just make sure you arent!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rufflyrustic

He got 8 years jail, 10 years probation or was that a good behaviour bond, or was the 10 years how long he had to stay away from the man, girlfriend and her children for.

Now to close it and leave it.......


W

---

At least you got to find out what happened to him. I did three cases and NOT ONCE did we find out what the sentence was.

Jurours - treated like #### and irrelevant to the 'real' game.

Richard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daddles

At least you got to find out what happened to him. I did three cases and NOT ONCE did we find out what the sentence was.

Jurors - treated like #### and irrelevant to the 'real' game.

Richard

---

In the case I sat on we were given a special phone number and the ref. no to ring to find out the sentence given.

Whilst I didn't like being on a jury I found that we were very well treated by the court staff and Judge and we were made to feel a very real and important part of the process. In my case I must agree with Danp and his comments about the accused being guilty.

The case came to the County Court after a Coroners hearing and a Committal hearing. The evidence was overwelming, not only the photographic evidence taken at the scene of the accident, the expert evidence, our own inspection of the site and the taped record of interview where the accusaed admitted guilt. Yet the accused pleaded not guilty, making us sit through 6 days of hearing evidence.

The only sad thing is that we couldn't set the lenght of sentence as I feel the Judge was too lenient.

Wendy, now that it is over forget about it, no good dwelling on it anymore.

Peter.