Tuesday, 8 July 2025

11 MORE ANGRY MEN

I've accepted jury duty and will be turning up next month for the selection process.

I feel that I have the requirements that are needed including:

  • A good education
  • Maturity and life experience
  • Managerial and commercial history with ability to process facts and come up with informed decisions
  • Some law study knowledge
  • Past jury duty experience
  • Open-mindedness formed by widespread reading and following of local, national and international politics news and social developments
  • Involvement in local community initiatives and groups
  • 16 years living in local community....
... which means I'll likely be knocked out at the first challenges by either the defence or prosecution lawyers - if I get through the ballot system.

Oh well I'll keep you posted up until I get elected or not. If selected the law requires that I cannot communicate on any case I'm involved in.










10 comments:

Rob said...

From my experience another requirement is to go with the opinions of the majority so everyone can get home. (I'm surprised that you were asked as it is not mandatory for pensioners).

Anonymous said...

No, that’s not my style. I held dissenting opinions in the previous trials.
I see it as my civic duty to contribute and actually wrote to the dept. of justice a couple of years ago asking to be considered.

TC

Richard (of RBB) said...

You da man, TC!

Anonymous said...

“da man”?
Distract Attorney? No, I try to be non partisan and make my decisions based on the evidence.

TC

THE CURMUDGEON said...

Oops! Sorry about that although 'Distract' attorney could be appropriate for obfuscation as they are often guilty of.
Of course, in New Zealand we have crown prosecutors.

THE CURMUDGEON said...

Why am I not surprised?

Rob said...

"No, I try to be non partisan and make my decisions based on the evidence."
So its goodbye anti Catholic bigotry and hello open minded examination of Scripture?

THE CURMUDGEON said...

It beats me how you made that assumption based on me saying that I follow the evidence. I don't think taking 'as gospel' biased writings of a couple of millennia ago is following the evidence.

Richard (of RBB) said...

I wrote a few of the scriptures. Sorry Rob, I never told you that, but it's true.

THE CURMUDGEON said...

Yes, that figures. No doubt you wrote:
- Ezekiel 23:19 - 20 and
- Deuteronomy 23:1.

I would have liked to have written 2 Kings 2:23-24