Yes, it is true. Spring break starts next week and I get to spend that break wasting time on jury duty. It’s not that I think serving on a jury is a waste of time. Many people may feel this way but I would enjoy the opportunity to hear the facts of the case, analyze and take note of the testimony and evidence, how prepared and effective the witnesses and lawyers are and how responsive or attentive the judge might be to the issues he or she is expected to preside over during the case. For me, that would be an ideal way to spend spring break. But the reality is I won’t be picked for any jury.
Sure, I’ll waste my time sitting in the jury commission, summoned by a process that hasn’t changed much if at all in the quarter of a century since I was first called for jury duty. I’ll probably get corralled into a few cattle lines of potential jurors and herded to a court room. I may even make it in the jury box, maybe even make it to voire dire. But I won’t be picked for a jury. No lawyer worth his silk tie wants me on their civil jury and while the prosecutor may be possibly be intrigued with having someone of my background on a criminal jury, the defense attorney would never allow it.
So off I will be herded with the others rejected or not chosen, back to the jury commission room where we will sit wasting our valuable time waiting on the more important players in the process, the lawyers and judges, to decide if and when they’ll actually want to drag us back through the halls to yet another courtroom and the same inefficient and frustrating process.
I was hoping that I’d be summoned for grand jury. This is a process I’ve studied, participated in and taught about for many years, but I’ve never served on a grand jury. I wouldn’t mind removing that experience from the bucket list.
As for petit jury service, I’ll be taking up space. On the bright side, I have a couple of books I look forward to reading, I won’t have papers to grade and I had already made arrangements for the housing hearings I would have typically heard next week so I'm free! I may have cases I am expected to hear in Pekin later in the week so I guess we’ll cross that bridge if I am still in the holding pattern after mid-week. In the interim, the plan is to keep a nice diary of the time spent and treatment during each phase and place and an overall assessment of the experience. I'll post that information and assessment here.
I will wish my fellow jurors good luck in advance. I should probably apologize for wasting their time and getting in their way if it turns out my number and place in the cattle call is higher than their own. I firmly believe it’s a citizen’s duty to serve on a jury and think actual jury service is a valuable experience. The process and approach to getting individuals to the courtroom into the jury box is the problem. It’s outdated and in need of attention as are many of the other antiquated approaches Illinois Circuit Courts limp through daily.
Day One: Directed to arrive at 1 p.m. Arrive at 12:50 p.m. Dismissed at 1:50 p.m. 100 or so people called for just enough time to interrupt and keep their day as unproductive as the court system but, fortunately, not enough time to deny us some exposure to an otherwise incredible day. We must return tomorrow at 9 a.m., St. Patrick's Day.
Day Two: Arrive at 9 a.m. Told that there may be two traffic trials we may be “needed for” and sit for the next hour until the big excitement is the clerk changing the television channel from news to . . . The Price is Right! A big hit with several of my fellow potential jurors, including the guy next to me who got so excited during the show he began to drop F-bombs more often than Richard Pryor. A near mutiny at 11:15 resulted from dissatisfaction with the soap opera that followed The Price is Right. And so we sat until 11:50 a.m., when one of the traffic judges decided it was prudent to call 30 of us to his courtroom. Yes, I was one of the 30 and no I did not get picked, didn’t make it to the jury box, but did get to observe more of the system “at work”.
Back in December, on the day of a sub-zero temperature snow and ice storm that shut down local schools and half of the city of Peoria, I appeared in this courtroom on behalf of the father of a co-worker. My client, in his mid-70’s, lived in an area of the city that had yet to be plowed. The wind was whipping along at better than 20 miles per hour, wind chills were below zero, downtown streets and sidewalks were snow on top of ice packed and treacherous. Some lawyers, myself included, made it to the court room dressed in attire, that, while more than acceptable at Caterpillar and very business like, was modified to reflect that most lawyers don’t spend our entire day in the friendly confines of the courthouse and actually may risk their personal comfort and safety to have the privilege to sit through a cattle call of hearings conducted in frantic lock step that only a Seinfeld fan could find amusing (think “Soup Nazi”).
Several lawyers, myself included, represented that the weather and road conditions prevented our clients from being able to get to the courthouse that day. The prosecutors and clerks fully understood those situations but warned “the judge won’t be happy”. And he wasn’t. After a career spent entirely in the Peoria County Courthouse, and now void of any recognition of life outside it, he was more interested in chastising lawyers and noting the parameters of his form over substance approach and management directives of his courtroom, what he “expects”. I am pretty well versed on the Illinois Code of Professional Responsibility and the Supreme Court Rules and I’ve yet to find the provision that says lawyers must wear neckties or wingtips, and my review of the law is that the lawyer’s appearance was sufficient, especially in a blizzard and under the conditions noted. But, as I often explain to my students, there is the law and then the “reality” of it’s application. In this case the reality depends on who holds the gavel.
In any event, it wasn’t surprising that this judge would pick a jury and then admonish those individuals who had otherwise been sitting, waiting to be picked for 3 hours, and had made it through the selection process that they would be released and have no more than 1 hour to find and eat lunch and “must” return within that hour. Whether it’s “my way or the highway syndrome” or a complete disregard for the world existing in even a 3 block radius around the courthouse, the judge completely ignored the fact that it was St. Patrick’s day, that a parade had just concluded, it was a sunny, 70 degree day and downtown Peoria was filled with green clad revelers spilling out of nearly every potential establishment his jury may head to for lunch.
The rest of us were “released” for the day and must return again this morning at 9 a.m. to further waste our time. Talk about economic de-stimulus. See my later post for some thoughts I’ve been collecting in that regard. I have also used the time to talk to some of the players at the courthouse and I’ve pieced together some simple suggestions for how the process could be updated a bit.
Day Three: Free at last! 6 hours of sitting, sitting, sitting and I’m out, free, done with jury duty. This is the most inefficient and frustrating process. I would guess that if James Madison or the other framers of the proposals that came to be known as the Bill of Rights had to endure what Peoria County jurors are expected to endure they would have rethought the 6th Amendment. Seriously, “judges school” should include a few days of jury duty and any lawyer deeming him or herself a “trial” lawyer should be required to serve jury duty before being allowed to participate in holding a group of 90 people hostage for several days in a cramped, hot room with Fox News or the Price is Right blaring on two televisions.
The room did boast WiFi but it the access and speed were reminiscent of a 14.4 dial up modem and with others sitting on top of you and few outlets use was limited or less than secure for most reasonable work purposes. The staff was friendly but not very informative, probably because they weren’t well informed themselves, lending to the feeling that jurors are an afterthought in the process, more a last minute but necessary guest to the party than the most important component of the “jury” trial process.
I can’t help thinking that some improvements to the process are both warranted and achievable. For instance, it doesn’t seem necessary to have all of those people sitting on hold in a room at the courthouse when the lawyers and judges are unsure whether they’ll need a jury or not. In this day and age, and especially since the information is collected, a system should be in place by which phone calls are made to the panel sought for a given courtroom and those individuals would have 1 hour to appear at the Jury Commission. While this would cause one judge, two or so lawyers and a few others to wait on the potential jurors to make their way to the courthouse and courtroom, it would inconvenience fewer individuals. Jurors could work, be productive and otherwise attend to things they are unable to attend to sitting, wasting time, waiting on cases that may or may not require a jury.
Those called for jury duty could provide their contact information and certify that they would be available and able to get to the jury commission room within an hour of being called. Only those individuals called to the courthouse for a jury panel would be paid for their jury service, a more than fair trade off for those not called, their families and their employers.
The judges might also help out by tweaking the pretrial processes that seem to facilitate lawyers and their clients in pushing the decision as to whether to “go to trial” to the very last minute, with innocent potential jurors wasting away in the jury commission room. That whole push to the brink of trial approach is outdated. It would be nice to see more confident lawyers, prepared, cases fully developed in advance of approaching trial dates, clients fully informed so that he or she can determine the bottom line. Judges should expect that lawyers be prepared and lawyers and litigants have given settlement their best shot several days before the scheduled trial date. Trial dates are for trial, not the last threat or push for a better settlement position. Judges shouldn’t allow 90 potential jurors to sit around day after day waiting on lawyers and litigants who aren’t sure whether or not they’ll really need a jury or not. It’s certainly not something judges would tolerate or lawyers or litigants would appreciate if the roles were reversed.
I guess we’ll find out the next time I’m called for jury duty. History suggests that few changes in the past 25 years will dictate few changes between now and the next time I am called.
It wasn’t a total waste of time. I was able to see a few things and have an opportunity to make my way around the courthouse to visit several people I don’t get to see too often. I am sure several of the experiences will find their way into parts of my courses. And I met several very dedicated and patient citizens, who, despite the shortcomings of the jury process, came obediently, diligently and attentively to serve their community.
Posts
