Could you sit on this jury?

[LolaMoon08]

I would have no hardships. I have no children. I am not married. I am a bartender and could take off the 6-8 weeks with no problem because my employers are great. They would not pay me, but I would easily be able to make it two months without pay because I am financially okay. I would not lose my home or car.

My only hardship is that I know Casey is guilty and nothing would change my mind.

 

[Sistah Sleuth]

I couldn't sit on the jury for this chick simply because I know she is a pathological, twisted, wicked, narcissistic child murderer who comes from a weird family.

 

[Kat]

I could not serve. I would have to excuse myself if I were not already disqualified for various other reasons including that I have watched this case on TV, read about it on the internet and my conclusion she is guilty.

 

[countzero]

Yep I could and have. Years ago I was a juror during a murder trial in Fla. Our kids were in school then. I have also been a witness in a white collar crime case.

 

[Oakley]

Being sequestered for 8+ weeks would not create a financial hardship for me. While I imagine it would be emotionally and mentally draining, I would love to be seated on this jury. Even if I was able to objectively consider only what would be presented during the trial (and I'd like to think I could,) I'm not sure I could effectively filter out what I've learned through WS's or other sources.

 

[chefmom]

As much as I would love to be there to secure one vote for Guilty/DP, I would not be able to serve. I work as an independent contractor, so I have no one to pay me jury pay and I'm not about to give up 2 months worth of pay. I also have pets, lawn care, a hubby, children, grandchildren, a life, like everyone else. I would simply be unable to be seated from the standpoint that I feel she is guilty.

 

[Blue Jackets fan]

I'm a full-time student so being I would have to be sequestered, most likely no.

 

[Just Jayla]

The problem with anyone on this forum being on the jury is not so much that we could not be fair-minded people...It's the fact that we know, through discovery doc dumps, discussion, sleuthing, and even case players that have commented here, exponentially more than any of the other jurors will hear.
I could not unlearn what I know, and what if I slipped in front of the rest of the jury? What if they made a point, and I countered with something I know from Websleuths that they never heard at trial? It would be bound to happen, either I would blurt to them, or blurt out in my head and base my verdict upon facts the judge did not tell me I could acknowledge. Even if I tried my 100% best to follow only the evidence presented, it would always be questionable to me whether or not I drew from all that I already know, especially if I found her guilty.

 

[Macushla]

Realistically, CM would not allow any of us 'idiot bloggers' to be on the jury. Event though we probably know more about this case than he does.

 

[Blue Jackets fan]

Realistically, CM would not allow any of us 'idiot bloggers' to be on the jury. Event though we probably know more about this case than he does.

I'm inclined to agree.
Pretty much anyone who has followed the whole thing (including Nancy Grace watchers) will NOT make a good jury on this case.

 

[OneLostGrl]

Nope, I'm a felon and have lost my right to be a "peer" to anyone who has committed a crime and is about to be tried in a court of law.

 

[momtective]

Absolutely not...I think they should have tried her, convicted her, sentenced her to death and carried out the deed in Jan 2009. :no:

 

[sharpar]

Nope Lasik and my kidneys make it impossible to sit for hours without a break.

 

[Tulessa]

Nooooooo!

 

[Jenny60123]

I could. I work for a company who pays their employees while on jury duty. I was once on a jury for a full week (murder trial) and was paid for the full week. I did have to come in on my off time though to get my work done. LOL.

 

[BigMomma]

I think I could be impartial as I would want to hear all the explainations and evidence in real surroundings without a pre formed opinion, but I'm knocked out because I have blogged for almost 3 years, except for that, I would be free to do it, retired, no financial hardhsips, nobody to care for that would need my constant care. It would be, to say the very least, very interesting and yes, heartbreaking. that part, I'm just not so sure I could get through that without crying for Caylee.

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

We've talked about what we would do if we were on the jury and much more. But I couldn't find where we've discussed if we could actually sit on this jury. After reading fellow posters yesterday about the difficulties people are having and not being able to serve, could you do it? I feel like I know all of you by reading your daily posts and opinions. I'm interested if you could or could not, and why.

My husband and I are both public employees. We do not have any children. The house and car is paid off. Realistically, I know I could be gone for 2 months.

And I get about not leaving your pets for 2 months. We have someone who already helps out with ours whenever we're gone.

Obviously for this case, no. But Scuba, you sound like my sibling if not my twin. SATH empty nester - husband public employee. Dogsitter at the ready (or dh himself) everything is hand financially and I am often gone for a month or so at a time - so unless I had tickets (and at this point, they're pretty much transferable for about 10 bucks), no financial or pet or childcare hardship - no medical - wasn't psychotic the last time I checked - nobody's business will close if I'm not there.

But you bring up an interesting point. Both DH and I give a snappy little salute and tromp on down to whatever courthouse they send us to when the summonses come. Many of our friends and family just toss them. Ya' rly. We suspect this is why we are regularly called. But I must say as someone who's income derives a great deal from the "I pay your taxes" citizenry, I think it would be very poor form for us to renege on our civic responsibilities. How about the rest of you guys?

 

[marlap]

I could. My work would pay my salary. No little kids. My mom lives with me and could look after my dog.

My feeling is that she's guilty as sin, but I know I could listen impartially.

If the defense really were able to give me doubts, I could acquit...but they would have to have great evidence.

On the other hand, I don't think they could say ANYthing to explain why she never reported Caylee missing.

Let's say I would be willing to give the defense a fair shot at convincing me there was doubt, but I would be surpised if they were able to.

 

[Teresa]

Oh my, I guess I probably would be a good catch. I'm a stay home mom, my husband is the wage earner, I have two older teens and don't NEED to be at home or work. Of course, things would be difficult for me and my family. I don't know if I could be unbiased...I have pretty strong feelings about this case. I could try if asked. Missing your family is not a hardship I guess. I think the prosecution would like me as I'm college educated, have been an early childhood educator, was a younger mom and am available for the most part. The same reasons would send the defense screaming. =-)

Teresa

 

[txanmom]

I haven't been looking on here or at this case in a long time. I have pretty much forgotten all of the doc's i read so i feel i could be impartial. Plus, i love to play devil's advocate which makes my family crazy. I don't work and i have 2 kids 9 and 13 and their dad travels for work, but it wouldn't be impossible. I feel i could arrange childcare and someone to look after my beloved DexterDoggie. I do have a visit from my mother upcoming, but we could reschedule. I do not have a moral problem with the death penalty in certain circumstances and I do believe everyone (no matter how much media attention has been paid) deserves a fair and impartial trial. I think i could do it. I have read books about certain convicted criminals in which all the evidence was laid out and i had a different opinion than the outcome of their trial. but i live in tx and it isn't gonna happen - SO i think ICA is guilty as he double hockeysticks and i hope she is sentenced to death. however, i do plan to watch every moment i am allowed on the media and court tv and maybe someone here can start a "mock jury" thread based on the actual trial testimony and we could all hash it out here....just a thought.