Some dude punched a bus driver 5 years ago, so I had to miss a week of work to sit on a jury and figure out if he actually did punch the bus driver. He pleaded not guilty, but the bus driver testified that the dude punched him and showed us a couple doctor’s notes verifying a facial injury. There were no witnesses to the smackdown as it was four in the morning. The defendant didn’t testify, and the defendant’s lawyers didn’t do anything during cross examination of the bus driver to indicate that some other scenario might have happened. So it was the bus driver’s word against…well…nothing. So…uh…guilty?
The question mark is because the moron defense was only rivaled by the moron prosecution; which, despite a completely open-and-shut case, and despite trotting five cops and MTA workers up and asking them about their occupation, education, number of children, and whether they prefer “Who’s the Boss” or “Family Ties,” never fully explained to us the charges of 2nd Degree Assault and whether punching a bus driver meets the criteria. So we go into the jury room and try to literally figure out if we missed something–because the case seems so simple, and the lawyers couldn’t be THAT inept, could they? In fact, it seemed so easy that it took the jury a while to figure out our verdict.
The only thing the jury agreed on right off the bat was that if either lawyer had been at all competent, we would’ve reached a verdict in two seconds, and it could have just as easily been “Not Guilty” if the defense had even tried to cast a reasonable doubt on the event. Instead, their argument was that the defendant didn’t “punch” the driver, he hit him with the back of his open hand. (Apparently the defense was trying to convince us that you can backhand a bus driver, just not punch one. Great defense.)
Oh, also, all this fuss over some dude punching some other dude 5 years ago. And the case has been to trial twice before already. That means 42 jurors have lost work days, and a judge, 4 lawyers, a bailiff, four court cops, a court reporter, and a court clerk have all been paid to sit on this case thrice (though I’m sure the staff was different for each version of the case). Your tax dollars at work, people.

I sat on a jury last year that was for a metro card “fraud” case – a homeless man trying to get on the subway for free. 6 days, approximately, oh, 2 hours a day with a several-hour lunch break daily. The most inefficient process I’ve ever been a part of. I wanted to scratch my eyeballs out. And never pay taxes again.
I want to sit on a jury just so I can see if I can do the whole Runaway Jury thing with them. Why can’t that just happen?
BTW, sorry I’ve been MIA here lately. My reader stopped picking your site up… I have to change that. I thought you stopped blogging!