Did mock jury duty last night. 6pm-midnight for $110 and we earned every dollar! I am bound by confidentiality with regards to the details of the case but the process is what I found fascinating.
We first received a lecture about our responsibilities as jurors (21 of us/3 juries of 7 listening to the same case) and how the process was going to work. Each juror was known by their number and the whole group was addressed by the name of our county. The gentleman speaking was a PhD and the owner of the business but I never did learn what his PhD was in. He was probably in his early sixties. Very smart and knowledgeable and an excellent speaker.
Next step was the voire dire. It was done en masse and electronically. I don't know how many questions we answered but everyone was very fidgety and tired of sitting and bored by the time it was over. We each had a hand-held electronic device with a knob we turned to the number of our answer. The devices could be set instantaneously by the "control room" to go from 0-100 or from 1-2. It's a cool process because the lawyers can track the verdict of each juror and determine whether the juror they thought would be biased against them actually decided in their favor and vice versa.
The plaintiff's (car accident victim) lawyer gave his presentation, the defendant's (insurance company/other driver) attorney gave his presentation, and then the plaintiff's lawyer came back for rebuttal. During the presentation we relayed our impressions real-time by twisting the knob on the box. Start out at 50, dial above 50 if the lawyer is really scoring some points, dial below 50 if the lawyer is hurting his cause. I remember these being used during the debates during the last election. All this was being recorded and synched with what the lawyer was saying at that moment.
After the presentations were complete, each 7-person jury went to a separate room. Each of us filled out a verdict form and a questionnaire which included who won, any monetary awards, the best/worst evidence/arguments of each side, and what additional information we would have liked to have had prior to deciding the case. The papers were taken away and then we each spoke to a camera to recite our verdict, monetary award, what made us decide the way we did, and anything else external to the process that affected our decision.
We all stayed in the room together during the "interviews" so we heard the decision of the others and why they made the decision they made. Also, the lawyers got to hear exactly why each person had made their decision. I think it was also an excellent way to make sure everyone got heard prior to the group beginning it's deliberations. I had been appointed foreman of my row/jury earlier in the evening.
Deliberations went quickly because everyone found for the plaintiff. The plaintiff's lawyer presented a very fact-based case with plenty of evidence that was informative but not overly complicated. The defendant's attorney was thin on evidence and facts and presented arguments that are your worst nightmare of what an insurance company would say when denying your claim. I guess the plaintiff's attorney's presentation was a bit thin and convoluted because their position was weak. His reliance on emotion rather than evidence didn't help him.
We agreed on the monetary award pretty quickly even though we started with a large gap from low to high. It was getting close to midnight and everyone was tired and ready to go home so cooperation was the word.
The experience was interesting and I'm glad I did it. The process was more fascinating than the case. I would love to know how each side reacted to the results of the mock jury and what was the final outcome. I'm in the database and will be called whenever my demographics pop up again. I'm taking snacks next time!
I will never again complain about paying the premium for the umbrella policy or for the cost of the high liability limits required on my automobile insurance. Stuff happens.