Talk:Jury duty

Suggest to change article name to Jury Duty in the United States

This article reflects a USA point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rigurat (talk • contribs) 21:25, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

How are jurors called?

How is one "called for jury duty"? Do you get a letter in the post, or do they grab people from the street, or what? Perhaps somebody who knows about the process in their country could add a note about this. 86.147.98.74 (talk) 13:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

In the US, you get a summons from the court in the mail requiring that you serve on a certain date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.235.100.87 (talk) 23:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Venire Duty

What the general public calls "jury duty" is correctly called venire duty. The citizen is not actually participating in jury duty until after they complete venire duty and are selected to serve on the jury. Unless the citizen is selected to serve on the jury, then their duty is to serve as a venireman and participate in the pool of potential jurors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.69.203.224 (talk) 08:45, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Voir Dire

A Section for this topic needs to be introduced in this article, its a critical part of the jury selection process. Nowhere in this article does it mention it. JasonHockeyGuy (talk) 03:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

More detail on the process?

I'm just wondering if there can be more detail on what the process involves for the juror. What hours can they expect, what breaks can they expect, what happens if they're sequestered etc. Are there penalties for breaching the privacy of the witnesses or victims eg naming rape victims? What other penalties can they face? What grounds can they use to get out of jury duty? Will this be discussed in private or in front of a room full of potential jurors (esp medical exemptions)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.140.36 (talk) 11:06, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Australia

From what I understand, the information in the section on Australia is exactly the same as the process in other countries like the States. What is the relevance of this section? Can it be filled out more if Australia is indeed different than other countries? Umma Kynes 08:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ummakynes (talk • contribs)

Different administration, legislation, etc., really. I have expanded upon this but there are numerous similarities among the jurisdictions using an adversarial system. --Qwerty Binary (talk) 16:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Change from Constitution

When did it change from 12 jurors to only 10? There was the expression "Hung Jury" meaning 1 or 2 had voted in opposition to the others and stalemated the process and the trial redone or dismissed. There was the Henry Fonda movie 12 angry men about a jury deliberating and how one man persuades the whole team to come to his side. There was the 1996 movie The Juror where one juror is stalked to get her to change her mind in the jury case. Her vote must have been weighty enough for the movie to make sense. Now all you need is 10. Kristinwt (talk) 05:39, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

There's just two states that have the non-unanimous juror system. Here in Oregon and in Louisiana. They're the only two states that don't require the full twelve jurors to convict. Dawnseeker2000 02:26, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

I suppose this would vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction (unless it doesn't, as things, whether by design or happy accident, are uniform)? To answer the question, "when did it change...?", I'm sorry that I don't know. --Qwerty Binary (talk) 16:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Pay or Compensation for Duty?

What is the pay or compensation for doing jury duty in each of the states? In the state of New York, the pay is $40 per day. What is it in the other states? What is it in the UK or Australia? Stevenmitchell (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Given that there was a section for it, I believe, to the best of my knowledge, that the external link that I have included addresses this. --Qwerty Binary (talk) 16:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Removing US Jury Duty "Reactions" - undue weight.

Under the U.S. section the main paragraph of "Reactions" seems like it was just there to promote some fringe libertarian idea. The Supreme Court case cited in the previous section was decided over a hundred years ago and the conscription belief is not widely held or known. I believe this gives undue weight and serves to "teach the controversy".

I'm removing it and leaving this note in case anyone wonders why or wants to discuss. --Dronthego (talk) 22:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit number 1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:244:4E02:3280:89B4:813E:40F0:EBE (talk) 22:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)