I've yet to build up sufficient information on the jury system for 2302s- which is a major omission I'll try to correct this semester - but there are a few thoughts on jury duty from Andrew Sullivan's site - and places he links to - to get something kick-started.
A writer at Slate wonders why people don't enjoy the opportunity to do something different for a few days, and offers this indictment: "I feel like as a society we've coordinated on a pointless anti-social
norm that you're some kind of sucker if you're willing to just smile and
do what the judge wants even though there are no really good
self-interested reasons to want out." The author offers the following link as a guide for those who want to opt out: be verbal, be subtle and be biased. The story refers to the American Society of Trial Consultants.
A response points out that not everyone can take significant time off of work. This is especially true for service on grand juries - the people who decide what cases go to trial. It always seemed tome likely that this introduces tremendous bias in the criminal justice system. There are certain to be significant demographic differences between the type of people who can and cannot serve on grand juries. It seems likely that this has consequences for what cases do and do not go to trial.
The jury remains one of the more interesting institutions in American government - where else might the bulk of population have their opinions heard in the actual operations of government?
