Re: Jury duty considered harmful, or at least rare

[Petro <petro@playboy.com>]

At 10:01 PM -0500 9/24/98, James A. Donald wrote:
>    --
>At 9:12 PM -0500 9/23/98, James A. Donald wrote:
>> > To rig a jury by excluding undesirables such as Tim May
>> > would be far too laborious.  To rig a jury it would be
>> > necessary to
>
>At 09:52 AM 9/24/98 -0500, Petro wrote:
>> No, no, On the contrary, far too easy.
>>
>> There are certain people who are NEVER called to jury duty,
>> people convicted of felonies & etc. simply put the name of
>> an undesirable on this list,
>
>The number of identifiable undesirables is too small to
>guarantee the desired trial outcome.  To ensure a desired
>outcome it would be necessary to screen out a very large
>number of potential undesirables.  It would be much easier to
>screen in a small number of desirables.

	At first yes, but over time the list could/would be grown. Also,
the list of non-criminal undersirables is _only_ those people who would
WANT to serve on the jury, but are too smart/savy/stubborn to pant at the
feet of the lawyers.
--
petro@playboy.com----for work related issues. I don't speak for Playboy.
petro@bounty.org-----for everthing else.      They wouldn't like that.
                                              They REALLY
Economic speech IS political speech.          wouldn't like that.