Florida Shooters Network

I have just returned from 2 days of jury duty service at the US District Court "Middle Florida" district in Tampa. I participated in Voir-Dire for one case, but was not impaneled, as I expected not to be. Apparently, I know too many "legal professionals" having been (at one time) an affiliate member of the Carrollwood Bar Association. Ah well.

Still, it was quite an interesting experience listening to the voir-dire. The case regraded two defendants who were charged with several counts involving conspiracy to commit armed robbery and use of force via firearms, or some such thing. We were not told the full extent of the charges at voire-dire. I gather that it was made a federal case because it involved going across state lines or something like that.

What was interesting (and of potential concern to us in FCC) is how the defense atty's asked questions about people's feelings about "firearms." There were at least 10 people (20% of the total jury candidate pool) that were anti-gun and felt they could not render a fair and impartial verdict because they were anti-gun. Furthermore, there were some that claimed they weren't totally anti-gun, but they felt that "guns were to prevailent" in our society and that "anytime you bring a gun to a situation" you have a risk of escalated crime, and that "guns should only be for defense of home..." Holy Shiznit! I thought I was back in the PRNJ! If this is representative of the actual community, we pro-2A folks are in some serious trouble!

Hopefully, these were just people who were attempting to get out of jury service by pushing the 2A "hot item" button. And they were excused from service... all of them. Also, thankfully, there was one gentleman I sat next to who is pro-2A and who did get impaneled onto that jury. I wish I knew his name but I didn't have time to exchange info with him. But he's definitely one of us. I wish him the best.

Anyway, assuming what I saw was an accurate reflection of our community, we have a lot of fears to allay and a lot of education to convey. Let's keep up the offers to take people to the range and answering questions whenever & wherever we can.

Our lives and liberties depend on it.

Potential jurors don't always tell 100% truth.
Most tell what the attornies don't want to hear so they would be released.

rug357 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 02, 2018 5:43 pm Potential jurors don't always tell 100% truth.
Most tell what the attornies don't want to hear so they would be released.

As stated above. Precisely why I think most said what they said. Still....

FfNJGTFO wrote: ↑Tue Oct 02, 2018 4:44 pm There were at least 10 people (20% of the total jury candidate pool) that were anti-gun and felt they could not render a fair and impartial verdict because they were anti-gun. Furthermore, there were some that claimed they weren't totally anti-gun, but they felt that "guns were to prevailent" in our society and that "anytime you bring a gun to a situation" you have a risk of escalated crime, and that "guns should only be for defense of home..." Holy Shiznit!

Actually, if only 20% of the Venire identified themselves as anti-gun, that's not too bad. You've got to figure (as you suspected) that some people just don't want to serve and know what hot buttons to push to get themselves dismissed. After all, it's said that a jury consists of six people that weren't smart enough to get out of it.

If you figure another 20% count themselves as "not anti-gun, but . . . " (i.e., Fudds) then that still leaves 60% who are either pro-2A or at least intelligent enough to be open minded about it.

rug357 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 02, 2018 5:43 pm Potential jurors don't always tell 100% truth.
Most tell what the attornies don't want to hear so they would be released.

or a well timed racial slur and your out of there in a heartbeat.

if they paid people an honest days wage, there would be more enthusiasm

When I've been called for jury duty, in VA and FL, I knew I wouldn't be seated. Nothing to do with firearms but I'm an engineer and lawyers hate people who aren't swayed by emotion, who are trained in objectivity and just look at the facts. I never even made it to voir dire because they'd look at my background form and not even consider me. Finally I got tired of sitting around for no reason and got a medical exemption, taken off the list.

jjk308 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 03, 2018 7:28 am When I've been called for jury duty, in VA and FL, I knew I wouldn't be seated. Nothing to do with firearms but I'm an engineer and lawyers hate people who aren't swayed by emotion, who are trained in objectivity and just look at the facts. I never even made it to voir dire because they'd look at my background form and not even consider me. Finally I got tired of sitting around for no reason and got a medical exemption, taken off the list.

Which amazes me that I was impaneled on my last petit jury, as I made it clear that I was an analytical person and not swayed by emotion. I didn't do it to get out of the service. I wanted them to know that I could apply the facts to the law as given by the court/judge. So I was picked. Good thing I was, because the prosecutor in that case I think was relying heavily on those emotions to get a conviction... he had established no evidence whatsoever. I mean, the defendant was charged with several weapons charges (i.e. posesison of deadly weapon... posession of a weapon for unlawful purposes, etc.), but he never established that the defendant ever possessed the weapon! We ended up acquitting on all the major charges except one very small "simple assault" charge (a 30 day in jail variety) which they actually added to the indictment while the trial was in progress.

Ah well... The wheels of justice...

It was pretty much standard in VA. I worked in a mostly engineering organization and in all my years there only one coworker ever served on a jury despite having 3 state courts and a federal court in the immediate vicinity. Same thing happened in Fl when I retired here.
They just hate engineers.

jjk308 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 03, 2018 5:39 pm It was pretty much standard in VA. I worked in a mostly engineering organization and in all my years there only one coworker ever served on a jury despite having 3 state courts and a federal court in the immediate vicinity. Same thing happened in Fl when I retired here.
They just hate engineers.

So, they'd summon you but just not impanel you, or did they just give up on summoning you?