American Jury Research - anyone done this?

[Exchme]

I've sat on several juries, found all the cases interesting and I think we reached the right verdict each time.

The most righteous civil case was one was where someone had done a bad job for a developer so he had a contractor come in and fix it in record time and then the developer refused to pay, saying the invoices weren't right and the contractor's testimony shouldn't be believed. The lack of payment caused the contractor's whole business to fold and ruined him.

We found for the contractor as the believability factor wasn't even close. We learned after the trial that the developer had collected on the insurance of the firm that did the original bad job and was trying to walk away with the insurance money. Here's the punchline - the developer had used "our" contractor's invoices and testimony in the insurance case to get paid!

That felt good to get that right! After learning the rest of the story, wish we could have added a swift kick too. So these cases are important to the people involved and I hope that people do their best to participate on juries.

 

[Mmm Rrr]

I did this several years ago. It was a case where an individual was suing a local municipality and a private party following an accident.

We listened to about an hour's evidence from the injured party's attorney and then each of us was asked to apportion the liability among the parties that might be partially responsible. They then asked us to formulate a $$ amount for damages and pain and suffering. There was no negotiation or discussion among the mock jury members.

We then answered questions from the attorney about how his evidence had impacted our views and how that might change if he gave us additional facts. The attorney for the municipality then joined us (they had told us others were watching through a mirror). He asked similar questions about how additional facts might impact our views on liability and damages. They didn't say, but I expect that the data they gathered was used to try to come to a settlement before trial.

I enjoyed it a lot. It was just a morning's commitment, and we were fed lunch and paid about $30 an hour. I've been on several juries and this process didn't include any of the frustration with the judicial system and the fellow jurors I had felt during actual trials.

A couple of years after, I saw the resolution of the case on the local news (they were supposed to keep it anonymous but the facts of the case were pretty specific). I was pleased to see the damages awarded were in the ballpark of what most of us had decided was fair, even though both attorneys has seemed to find the amount high.

 

[Sunset]

yup. i participated in a mock jury "trial" for a medical malpractice case. several hours on a saturday and sunday hearing evidence and then rendering a verdict. we also had to explain our votes. we received a meal and $. it wasn't much but then i did it for the experience. i've never served on a real jury and would love to do that.

Well if they ever call me again (I got out of it the first time), I'll give you a referral

If they would assign a courthouse within 15 miles of home and NOT the California one in Chicago, I would be more willing.

 

[2017ish]

We used mock juries occasionally on both sides of civil cases over the years. Valuable when an unusual case comes up.

If I ever had a chance to serve on one (highly unlikely), I'd think about grabbing it--mainly because the odds of my ever being allowed on a real jury are vanishingly small....

 

[gauss]

Unlikely.
Some criminals—Jeffery Epstein—could afford the services of this company.
Almost all criminals—for example, Jeffery the burglar—could not.
But civil lawsuits—think tobacco—could easily afford the service.

Off the top of my head, I was thinking it might be a Product Liability case.

If this is the case, and you have a logical thinking process, you may frustrate the attorneys because you may see through their smoke and mirrors and potentially have the chance to effect other mock jurors thinking -- if they let you interact.

Might be fun.

-gauss

 

[Bamaman]

Every time I've reported for jury duty, I was the first to be sent homes.

Something about my education level and past job experience in finance makes me too judgmental for the defendant's side. I've seen all sides of life.

 

[rk911]

Well if they ever call me again (I got out of it the first time), I'll give you a referral

If they would assign a courthouse within 15 miles of home and NOT the California one in Chicago, I would be more willing.

many years ago i did spend one day with about a hundred other people in a potential jury pool at 26th and California. we were divided into groups of 20 and each group was given a number. every so often a bailiff would enter the room and call out 2 or 3 numbers and the folks in those groups would head on down to a courtroom for voir dire. sadly, my group was the only group that was never selected that day.

 

[Koolau]

I did sit on a criminal trial jury once. What a bore. We spent 80+% of our time waiting in the jury room while the lawyers negotiated with the judge about what questions/evidence they could present (I'm assuming all this - what else could it have been?)

I also sat on a focus group regarding my credit union. Combining the two sounds like not enough compensation for truly boring w*rk but YMMV.

 

[scrabbler1]

I did sit on a criminal trial jury once. What a bore. We spent 80+% of our time waiting in the jury room while the lawyers negotiated with the judge about what questions/evidence they could present (I'm assuming all this - what else could it have been?)

I also sat on a focus group regarding my credit union. Combining the two sounds like not enough compensation for truly boring w*rk but YMMV.

I surely agree with you about lawyers wanting to talk, based on my 3 stints on jury duty.

The first time, in November of 1987, I got onto a criminal case (shoplifting). After sitting around in the central jury room all day Monday, they bussed 30 of us to the criminal court building nearby to be interviewed for the case, which I became part of the 6-juror panel (plus an alternate). The next day the ADA presented his case. Wednesday was Veterans Day so the courts were closed and I reported back to work. On Thursday, when we checked in, the judge told us the case would not continue until Monday so we were sent away and I reported to work Friday. On Monday, the defense presented its case, we deliberated and found her guilty.

The lawyers were busy yakking it up, as we were sent back into the jury room several times. The walls were thin so we could hear the lawyers and the judge arguing.

The second time, in June of 1996, I was among 30 jurors to be interviewed for a drunk driving case, called late in the day like before. I made it into a group of jurors answering preliminary questions before we adjourned. The next day, the two sides agreed on a plea so went back to central jury, this time a more pleasant environment than before. That day and the next day, I was not called again for another case so I was dismissed. The lawyers weren't as yakkety as before, at least in our presence.

The third time, in October of 2007, I was among 30 jurors to be interviewed for a civil case. A judge is not present during this civil jury process, so the two very yakkety lawyers run the show. It took all day, as the lawyers were busy dismissing potential jurors and emptying out the gallery area. By 4:30 PM, they finally had their 6 jurors plus an alternate while a few of us, including me, remained in the gallery area and were never called for further questioning. We were dismissed from further service. This occurred on a day I would have had to go to New Jersey for work, as I was working only 2 days a week, so I was spared the annoying trip and didn't have to switch to a different day.