Add RSS RSS

Shackles for D.C.-ites Who Skipped Out on Jury Duty

Ankle shackles.jpgLawyers tend to respect the call of jury duty due to their line of work, but for the general population, a jury summons is sometimes seen as optional. Most come up with a good excuse for exemption, while others simply ignore it. Fed up with those who were ignoring the summons, the D.C. Superior Court issued 100 bench warrants.

A good amount of residents responded to the warrant, but five people were arrested and taken into custody. And then shackled and brought before the judge. Harsh.

From the Washington City Paper’s City Desk:

Earlier this week, five residents were taken into custody, according to court spokesperson Leah Gurowitz. These five spent some time behind bars. At least some, appeared before a judge — to explain their jury-duty failings — in shackles.

In an e-mail, Gurowitz explained the court’s actions: “The Superior Court issued bench warrants only for those people who had ignored two court orders: a jury summons and an order to appear at a ‘show cause hearing’ to explain their failure to appear for jury service.

Our goal is not to arrest people, but to underscore the requirement of obeying court orders and the importance of jury duty. It is not fair to those who do serve jury duty for others to simply ignore it… [F]or those who shirk their civic duty, there are consequences.

Be warned: Shackles are a possible consequence. Maybe D.C. should take it a step further and set up a pillory in front of the courts for truant jurors. Or make them wear a scarlet J.

We’re a little sympathetic to the errant jurors. D.C. has a population of around just under 600,000 and a whole lot of crime, so it seems like the jury summons comes to residents all too frequently. It’s a good thing that most residents work in the law and feel obligated to serve.

Truant Jurors Arrested, Shackled [City Desk / Washington City Paper]

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 9:11 AM

I've got jury duty coming up. Any suggestions on a good BS excuse to get out of it?

Thanks, John Q. Public

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 9:14 AM

Say that you cannot be an impartial juror because the defendant is a Negro.

Larry David

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 9:22 AM

I hope I get to cross examine you Mr. David, as the above will be on the record.

avatar
4 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 9:40 AM

"I am a racist against all races, including my own."

-Homer Simpson

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 9:43 AM

Another reason to live across the river.

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 9:55 AM

DC residents should shun jury service until statehood is granted. That'll get Congress moving.

avatar
7 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 10:03 AM

I used to live in DC. As white males, my father & I got called eevry 2 years like clockwork in an attempt to get a representative pool. Of course, I always got out of it, but it's a pain in the ass to have to go every 2 years.

avatar
8 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 10:04 AM

"We're a little sympathetic to the errant jurors. D.C. has a population of around just under 600,000 and a whole lot of crime, so it seems like the jury summons comes to residents all too frequently."

If I recall correctly, one of the boxes you can check to opt out is that you've showed up for jury duty in the past 2 or 3 years (regardless of whether you were picked).

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 10:07 AM

Why am I in a great mood today? Because Paula Franzese is talking to me via videotape!!!

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 10:20 AM

I know its shirking your public duty, but theres gotta be better use of judicial economy and jail cells

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 10:25 AM

Jesus, she started singing The Supremes.

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 10:37 AM


You didn't give the full breakdown on DC's population though.

1. It has 600,000 residents but 300,000 are convicted felons and of the remaining 300,000 only 200,000 have addresses.

2. Then of those 200,000 there are 40,000 au peres and nannies who aren't citizens.

3. Of the remaining 160,000 there are 60,000 school-age children.

4. Finally, of the remaining 100,000 there are 99,000 lawyers (who almost always get booted from juries during voir dire).

So that last 1,000 gets worn out pretty bad.

avatar
13 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 10:59 AM

10:37 - quality

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 11:01 AM

10:03: you and your father are complete idiots, and unpatriotic too.
friggin morons

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 11:25 AM

DC is an unmitaged shithole.

avatar
16 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 12:07 PM

I think there is great value in maintaining D.C. as a non-state federal entity. That said, there shouldn't really be any residences in the District (except, I suppose, the White House, and perhaps the residences of other top members of the federal government). Shrink it. Or get everyone to move 10 miles to Maryland or Virginia. Sheesh.

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 12:19 PM

Oh, Paula Franzese - the naughty things I want to do to you.

avatar
18 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 12:19 PM


Or, 12:07, let Maryland administer all the non-federal property and people. DC is smaller (size and population) than Montgomery County.

avatar
19 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 12:34 PM

12:19, exactly. That's more or less what I meant when I said "shrink it."

avatar
20 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, July 11, 2008 5:49 PM

Nah. Just give all of DC east of the Anacostia River over to PG county. That would essentially consolidate all the shitty areas in the dc metro region into a single county, which would make redlining and service deprivation so much easier.

avatar
21 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, July 12, 2008 5:47 PM

Jury service is a public duty. It is one of the most fundamental aspects of our democracy. I work on trials and most jurors that I see are upset when they get picked, but actually tend to not want to leave once the trial is over because of how much can be learned from the experience. It is sad that anyone would try to get out of it, and have the absolute audacity to pretend to be a bigot to do so. Plainly, you should be ashamed. Litigation and trials are very important to an organized democracy, and shirking that responsibility is selfish.

A citizen.

Post Your Comment