Submitted by Jazzlike_Breadfruit9 t3_yk5p5b in Pennsylvania

I was summoned for jury duty for the first time recently. When I reported for duty I was told I would receive $10 for the day, plus travel pay that was another few dollars. My job doesn’t pay you for serving on jury duty so this is all I made that day. Not a huge deal, happy to do my civic duty, until they told us if we were picked we could expect to be there for a week for the trial. 6 days, making only around $70 total. That is a HUGE financial hit for myself and I assume others. 25% of my month’s income gone. Some people need to pay for parking and/ or childcare for days with jury duty as well.

I don’t see how fair representations of the population can be on juries when a lot of us can’t survive with a week of next to no income.



You must log in or register to comment.

IamSauerKraut t1_iurhl49 wrote

We have a legislature that allows itself large pay raises but we cannot seem to get them to do actual work. Such as raising jury pay to something meaningful.


mittenedkittens t1_iurpp3s wrote

Pennsylvania is one of the largest and highest paid state legislatures in the country. And I'll tell you, those folks really do a bang-up job. Worth every penny, including their generous per diem rates. These guys, they really deserve it.


themollusk t1_ius302c wrote

PA is the largest "full time" (technically speaking, as they don't actually do that much work) legislature, and I think it might even be the second largest overall?

New Hampshire is the largest state house in the country.


DoctorSteve t1_ius66ro wrote

Nothing Libertarians like more than a large and well funded government!


mittenedkittens t1_iuseqwf wrote

Yeah, I thought it was hilarious. The last time I looked up or knew any of these figures was a few years ago, and I'd remembered California being right up there with PA for both compensation and size of the legislature. I did not remember NH. It tracks though, as they claim to be a "Citizen" legislature. The fun part there though is that their pay is so woefully inadequate that it discourages anyone who isn't turbo wealthy from being a state rep/senator, just as the Mises libertarians intend.


Ham_Ahoy t1_iutjcf6 wrote

The thing I can't stand the most about Mises libertarians . . . Mises died penniless in a paupers grave. If he was the greatest economic mind in history, shouldn't he at least have died. . . Wealthy? If your obsession was art, at least you could make the case that Van Gogh, or really most famous artists aren't appreciated until their death. Mises couldn't even get a job as a bank president or whatever after being minister of finance of a major European country. How do you defend that kind of clear and obvious incompetence?


[deleted] t1_ivp08y2 wrote

You do realize that the Mises Institute has nothing to do with Ludwig von Mises right? It’s a well known thing that they co-opted his name for their political organization. Ludwig passed away before the institute was even created, so they asked his wife if she was okay with it, and she told them she was fine with it.

Ludwig was very well off in Europe, but he soon became an enemy of the state in 1940 because he opposed Nazism, so he fled to America with nothing to his name because his assets were seized by the govt. In America, he received a living stipend grant from the Rockefeller Foundation, as well as funding from the William Volker Fund. He then won a visiting professor position at NYU, which he held until his death.

Ludwig basically conceptualized the theory of the Austrian Business Cycle, which is very much used today. It explains how when Central Banks keep interest rates low for too long, it leads to banks and corporations abusing the lending process, which leads to market collapses that harm regular people. Ludwig was more of a liberal than people think. In fact, he was considered a progressive for his time, and was persecuted by the Nazis for it. He was very much anti-corporation, in that if they do stupid things, the govt should not help them. This way those businesses fail and the people can create better ones in their places.

Ludwig was a liberal, forward thinking economist who was simply a victim of the time (Nazism stifled his career). The Mises Institute is essentially a Libertarian think tank, which Ludwig had nothing to do with. Furthermore, Libertarian (Mises Institute) does not equate to Liberalism (Ludwig).

Remember, when people like Ludwig were discussing “free markets,” they didn’t mean a total lawless free for all. They simply meant things like no bailouts for dbag businesses and banks, and no Central Banks playing with interest rates in-favor of those banks and businesses. The only people who believe in total lawless free for alls are Anarchist Capitalists (AnCaps), which is completely unrelated to Ludwig.


Ham_Ahoy t1_ivp0y5j wrote

He died penniless because he was an idiot, and his disastrous economic literature has ruined the world.


mittenedkittens t1_ius39u6 wrote

Indeed on both counts. I didn't feel like typing out a bunch of caveats so I intentionally used vague language.


Joe18067 t1_iurv9p6 wrote

Or raise the minimum wage either.


GrandBed t1_iurzfma wrote

“We can’t keep taking advantage of the working poor if we don’t keep them poor” -elected officials


mediocre_mitten t1_iuvz5it wrote

At the very least a person should be compensated their days pay (easy enough to prove) + free parking.


IamSauerKraut t1_iuw1m34 wrote

Plus mileage and whatever meals are needed. Plus non-water drinks for all those hours waiting in that sweatbox of a room you get held in until called into a courtroom.


sgardner1990 t1_iurj8yg wrote

I have never been summoned personally. But my ex at one point, he was able to write in/call in to the clerk of the court. An advise them that doing so would put him in financial hardship. I did see this is possibly an acceptable excuse in PA as well.

Good luck to you with this. The whole payment of jury duty needs reworked...


moon_is_a_satellite t1_ius2p5h wrote

The one time I was summoned I told them I couldn’t afford to miss work and they excused me. This is the way to go.


nonymiz t1_iuswdk1 wrote

Yep, they actually don't want people there that are upset with missing work... because they fear those people won't really do a proper deliberation and will just vote whatever they need to vote in order get it all over with so they can go home and get back to work.


Weary_Ad7119 t1_iusynfn wrote

The issue is then only the rich serve on trials. Businesses should just be required to pay it out and have to budget for a certain number of years or it can be a tax. IDC which, it just needs to be built in to the total cost of the employee.


banstyk t1_iuvb57p wrote

It seems to me that the state should pay from tax money and not the business? I mean the business is already hurt by the loss of an employee… also, what about people who are self-employed or retired? Are they not entitled to compensation for their time?

It’s appalling that people aren’t paid at least minimum wage, and of course even that would still be a hardship for most.


mynameisalso t1_iuzzrxo wrote

The jury should get to keep any seized assets if they fund the person guilty 😂


LameBMX t1_iutcidh wrote

You realize it's not the business problem? Make it too hard for a business to have an employee presence in your state, and they just won't. Even more so now with remote work so ingrained.

For example, PPG could virtually ghost the state fairly easy, keep the castle Grey skull address, and lean on their global resources fairly easy.

Of course it's doubtful any business would bail like that. But why should they pay when the government wants your time on top of the taxes they already pay the government?


Esqurel t1_iutjuit wrote

That same argument applies to most things, and the answer is the same: because we live in a society and everyone has to do their part.


LameBMX t1_iuu7hyp wrote

By the government, which both you and the business, are paying. The only party not really paying is the one receiving money.

Just picked a random Ohio one out of the blue. $50. Mileage. Hotel money if far enough away to justify. Iirc they also provide something resembling food.

If you want my time, why should anyone else pay me for it, but you? This isn't about doing a civic duty, strictly compensation for time missed from work.

I will concede there is some overly dramatic belly aching in these posts. If your business is going to fail due to a week of jury duty, odds are you have bigger problems.

Hell, I don't even have a dog in this fight. Between jobs, but last job a week unpaid wasn't going to break me, odds are no one would care about a week in jury duty anyways. Whatever the govmt gave is a nice gesture. But for others, it is. Specially when $10 hasn't even been gas money for like a decade.


JoeyCalamaro t1_ius8mzs wrote

>But my ex at one point, he was able to write in/call in to the clerk of the court. An advise them that doing so would put him in financial hardship.

I was never summoned for Jury Duty back when I lived in PA, but since moving to Florida I've served three times in the span of about ten years. Since I'm self-employed, I'm not entitled to any compensation beyond the nominal $10 or whatever Florida gives you. And, if I'm not able to work, my business is completely dead in the water and I'm not only losing money, I'm losing customers.

As the primary wage earner for my household, that's a huge hit to my livelihood — but no one seemed to care. I wrote letters, spoke to Clerk of Courts, and even tried to appeal to the good nature of the judge(s) after I showed up. But each time I was met with indifference, at best, or even outright annoyance. One judge in particular actually made things worse for me, after I explained my situation by scheduling me as a standby juror for week.

Things might be different back in PA, but, here at least, my "excuses" never got me out of anything.


RogueA t1_iusiask wrote

That's because you're living in a state that actively tries to make things worse for literally everyone living there. Most other states you can get out of duty with financial hardship.


strikervulsine t1_iuuafis wrote

Tell them you don't believe a word the police say and believe in jury nullification and they'll dismiss you so fast your head will spin.


Treestyles t1_iuukkoc wrote

Jury nullification isn’t a belief, it’s the law.


strikervulsine t1_iuuuhj8 wrote

It's more a consequence of the law. During instructions, you're specifically told that, if you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, you must convict them.

Of course, the jury has the final say, so even if you think they did what they're accused of, you can still vote not guilty.

You will almost certainly be dismissed if you mention it during selection.


Treestyles t1_iuuxnv9 wrote

Word games. It’s the difference between innocent and not guilty.

Ex: Sure, i had the weed they said i had, but i have no guilt about it because it’s not a real crime, and my peers should agree. I’m not innocent, but neither am I guilty.

That’s how it was intended to work, at least.


FatCigarMafia t1_iusy1g7 wrote

They should pay your full pay at your job and then the $10 per day on top of that and then a per diem for parking and food.


SnooRevelations9889 t1_iurh9bp wrote

It’s long overdue that the concept of a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work comes (back) to our state courts.

Federal jurors get $50 a day (until completing 45 days of jury service, then it goes to $60) — still a pittance, but they are (slowly) moving in the right direction.

Judges will chide people for trying to get out of jury duty, but it’s only the financially rational thing to do.

And things are tight for so many workers, it's pretty unreasonable to expect people to shrug off the loss of income.

But a little financial consideration would change the attitude of many potential jurors, and you'd see more people content to serve. A lot of folks would be like: "Well, it’s not what I could make otherwise, but it’s something.”


xeio87 t1_iurtezf wrote

I'm lucky that my job gives PTO for jury duty, has to be absolutly awful for anyone losing a significant amount of their income from a long trial.


Sennva t1_iv0mlzh wrote

Exactly. Only those retired or well-off financially can comfortably afford to serve jury duty as it stands. Everyone else is incentivized to try to get out of it by the need to earn enough to pay existing bills. I'm not sure how anyone can argue that doesn't skew the pool.

Thankfully it isn't common, but some trials last months. There have even been a few that lasted years! It is ridiculous to expect people to take such a drastic pay cut for an indefinite period of time and with so little notice.


SnooRevelations9889 t1_iv0pqi6 wrote

And those fortunate enough to have jobs that still offer paid time off for jury duty. It's not unheard of.

Of course, the boss might expect you to “catch up” on your tasks after serving jury duty, but that's a different issue.


Reynard1981 t1_iurmzsr wrote

Since they’re forcing people to serve jury duty, they should pay by the hour of at least your working wage or higher. Not to mention any travel expenses to get there.


FiendishHawk t1_iurqsy1 wrote

Actual wages might be a lot but they should at least pay local minimum wage, not kids pocket money.


originaljimeez t1_ius6v5y wrote

I pay my kids their pocket money at a wage higher than minimum wage.....


little_brown_bat t1_iutl0j1 wrote

You give your kids $174 a day? Imagine coming from this kind of privilege.


originaljimeez t1_iutljqw wrote

Hah! No! But I pay them more than $7.25 per hour when they do chores outside of their normal household responsibilities.


randomnighmare t1_iutwyjf wrote

The minimum wage in Pennsylvania is still at $7.25. Yeah, we suck.


reverendsteveii t1_iusjcsa wrote

No, actual wage is the only acceptable solution. I built my life assuming I'd be able to pay for it with the money I make at my job. My life will fall apart if you force me not to work my job. Therefore, the only way to make me whole if you use the threat of violence to stop me collecting a paycheck is to fully replace that paycheck.


ChipKellysShoeStore t1_iux4zn7 wrote

You understand trials would be prohibitively expensive then?


reverendsteveii t1_iuxbggc wrote

I think that if me serving jury duty without losing my home is prohibitively expensive then the onus is on the people who are using the threat of violence to force me not to work to figure out how to fix that. The jury, by definition, didn't do anything wrong and they get punished no matter what the outcome of the trial is.


PopeMaIone t1_iusov4s wrote

Too bad it is required and a duty as an American citizen. You'll get either get excused or suffer the consequences of blowing it off. You're not special


reverendsteveii t1_iusynyj wrote

Why are you so eager to brag about what the government is capable of?


PopeMaIone t1_iuszpwl wrote

Because we all have to do it. You're not special and you're not in the position to be making demands. I don't see it as bragging about what the government is capable of. I see it as bringing you back to reality and humbling you.


reverendsteveii t1_iut9de7 wrote

>I think we should all be compensated for our time spent performing jury duty

>You need to be brought back to reality and humbled and I, some jerkoff from the internet, am just the guy to do it

Jesus Christ dude get a hobby or start a drug habit or something


RunningOnPunkTime t1_iut6myn wrote

Yes and it is awesome that it's a duty. Juries are generally a good system that can provide more accountability.

No one's arguing that it's not a requirement/duty. No one's arguing that they're special. What they are arguing is that at the compensation that Pennsylvania gives for jury duty, you're not going to have the income that you would've planned on which can cause unnecessary financial distress.

However you never addressed any of that because you were so obsessed with "humbling" someone for that extra feeling of superiority that you seem to love so much.


PopeMaIone t1_iut8ql6 wrote

I don't feel superior hence why I'm not the one demanding to be paid an "actual wage" which was beyond the minimum wage that was suggested. So $25 to $50 an hour to do the duty the rest of us have to for free or $10. That kind of mentality inherently means they feel they're superior and their time and duty is worth more than everyone else's. Try to keep up with basic logic.


RunningOnPunkTime t1_iut9jyx wrote

Again. No one's arguing that ONLY they should get paid a living wage. That's ridiculous. Everyone here is talking about how the policy needs to change so that everyone receives the wages that they would've planned for within a certain limit. This person is merely talking about their own experience and needs within a conversation about a system that they believe needs to change.

This would also make trials cost a lot more which might have the secondary benefit of cutting down on all the unnecessary convictions for non-violent offenders.


PopeMaIone t1_iutarnb wrote

Okay I follow you and agree that's one way to look at it. Here's my genuine question: What do you call people that perform their duty without complaining for nothing or next to nothing because they feel its their duty vs someone whining and making demands to do that same duty? To me it would seem like the latter is an entitled douche but I guess it's a matter of opinion.


RunningOnPunkTime t1_iutcuve wrote

Why is that an entitled douche? Sounds like someone who doesn't want to be put in financial distress regardless of "duty". Idk about you, but my duty to my family comes way before I even think about the duty towards the state.

You're constructing the ideal person as someone who just accepts their "duty" regardless of harm. Someone who just accepts their duty and doesn't say anything even when it's causing harm to them or other people just sounds like a coward.

Your duty should be to try and make your community better. Being on a jury is an obligation that's one way of fulfilling that duty. As it stands, we're restricting jury duty to those who have the financial means to miss work and lose that money. This is just another way that the US is a plutocracy. We should ensure that no one misses out on their wages so that everyone can participate regardless of income. I think that ensuring everyone can participate as a member of a jury would make it all just a bit better.

Rather than being some coward who accepts the status quo without "whining or complaining", why not aim for something a bit better?


PopeMaIone t1_iutezbm wrote

Ahh, a coward is someone who does what is expected of them and sacrifices for others or the collective or even more simply someone who upholds their end of the social contract. The smart person is the one who demands a benefit for doing something, anything for their fellow man or society. Sounds very trumpian from someone I have no doubt is likely a leftist and not a fan of capitalism. Either way, you have a selfish worldview I hope doesn't spread.


RunningOnPunkTime t1_iutgkc1 wrote

Lol a selfish worldview is one in which it's ensured that everyone is provided for? I'll take that bullet. If it's selfish to say no to a duty to the community because I want to pay my mortgage and keep my family fed then yeah I guess I'm selfish.

I'm literally arguing for a system where people can actually do their duty to their fellow man without worrying about their own well being. But you haven't actually addressed that. All you've argued for is the status quo which, as I've argued unopposed, is harmful to people with lower incomes and prevents them from fulfilling their duty.

Try addressing my points rather than just flipping out because I called you a coward for arguing in favor of an unjust system.


PopeMaIone t1_iuti53r wrote

I'd say the system works. It's been working for 200 years. At most a person should get minimum wage for jury duty. Nobody is getting paid $30 an hour by the state to do a duty we have as a citizen. If you don't think this country is worth doing anything for free for, leave. Go to a better place. You won't.


RunningOnPunkTime t1_iutj0cm wrote

"don't improve the system! Just leave" Why would I leave? I want to make this country better rather than licking the boots of some dudes who died over 100 years ago. If you don't want people to be paid a living wage for jury duty that's fine, just advocate for a system where people can miss work and still have the resources they need.

The system might work fine (debatable), but why not make it better? America is the richest country in the world. Why shouldn't we be better? It sounds like all you want is some flaccid America that barely limps by. That's pathetic.


PopeMaIone t1_iutke5o wrote

I think I'd rather invest in a national healthcare plan then worry about paying for jury duty. We can't fix everything with other people's money....or can we...2030 with RunningOnPunkTime as our President spending 1000% of our annual GDP like NBD. Wait, why is our country debt ridden and stagnant? Dude this over promising, over spending and stifling taxation and regulations has turned America into just another socialist hellscape. Lock ROPT up for being incompetent and selling pipe dreams.

Alarm clock rings at 6am. I just had the worst nightmare. A reddit leftist ran the country promising everything to everyone and fucked it all up making no one happy.


RunningOnPunkTime t1_iutlel3 wrote

You really can't help but strawman can you? Not gonna actually address a single point or really even make an argument. Have a good night bud


PoiLethe t1_iut64tj wrote

No we aren't. But america has its duty to us as much as we have a duty to it, and it's not holding its side of the bargain. If God doesn't meet me halfway, God ain't getting my sacrifices and work no more.


PopeMaIone t1_iut6fg7 wrote

Okay, so blow off an unexcused jury duty summons and watch the government meet you the full way with a warrant for your arrest or a fine.


PoiLethe t1_iut6nms wrote

I'm already spiraling dude! Let's just find out where rock bottom really is.


PopeMaIone t1_iut7cw7 wrote

You're acting like I care if you get yourself in trouble for blowing off jury duty. What I do find comical is people like you and the guy I was replying to thinking they are in a position to make demands of pay because their time is so much more valuable than the rest of us. Nobody likes jury duty. Only entitled clowns make demands of being paid $35 or $50 an hour to show up. I bet you're also the type to tell the cop he can't arrest you as you're getting yanked by your neck through your freshly broken car window.


PoiLethe t1_iut8ta9 wrote

You're acting like you don't understand the point is that I think the rules should change and everyone should be able to survive on their income whether they are on jury duty or working at their job. The governments not increasing minimum wage to a livable wage? My value is less than livable? I don't owe them some civic duty that would put me in the streets. And the people on trial are owed a jury of their peers, per the laws. Are they getting that? Clearly not. The government is not fulfilling their duty by their own metrics. How hard is that for you to comprehend?


PopeMaIone t1_iuta0rm wrote

I get the basic premise that was being made. One could also argue a duty is a duty and you shouldnt be paid anything for it. It's one of the few things apart from paying taxes you must do to have the privilege of being an American. And since I'm not a self-loathing American, I actually believe it is a privilege to be American.

Having said that, I also don't think asking for minimum wage is out of order like the other commenter suggested which is why I didn't reply to them. I replied to the guy that went even further and said he'd need even more than that. He'd need an "actual wage" to show up to do his duty which could mean different things to different people but let's just be conservative and say $25 to $50 an hour. That's absurdly entitled and unrealistic thinking and if you don't think so then I think you may be suffering from that same entitled mindset. Not to mention this guy is just talking out of his ass. You know he's going to go to jury duty if he gets summoned and can't get out of it. So why talk tough online?


PoiLethe t1_iutc19q wrote

I think that's fine as long as you have enough time to prepare for a dip in wages. But if you don't know how long it will take that will definitely have a different effect on your bills if you are preparing for a week or a month. I understand duty, and I've created my bills around being able to afford things on minimum wage already. But for others that make more, but not as much in savings, I can see not being prepared for something that lasts that long, like a phone that's not paid off because you knew you'd be able to cover it every month, a loan, etc. If all those bills could be...given a forbearance in light of your duty that would make it a lot more tolerable. Idk if that's a thing already or what.


Reynard1981 t1_iuuw35e wrote

Since they’re forcing you to take the day off of work, they should pay equal wage at your job. It’s the state/federal, they can afford it.


elefantsblue t1_iures90 wrote

Now imagine how fair it is to those being held under its sword.


PickForMe t1_iuriiao wrote

Even sadder that you have to report that on your tax's.


IntoTheMirror t1_iurib55 wrote

Yeah. I can’t afford to make $10/day for days at a time. Just gonna tell ‘em I don’t trust the police.


hooch t1_iurs9dg wrote

Told them exactly how I feel about the police last time I was summoned, like 8 years ago. Haven't gotten jury duty since.


EmpiricalAnarchism t1_ius8fvq wrote

Yep ditto. “All cops are racist and I cannot in good conscious ever vote to convict based on evidence presented by a racist as that evidence is necessarily tainted.” I had to say it twice as they tried to select me again later in the day but that was that.


byndrsn t1_iurpz8x wrote

or you could just tell the truth in court and say serving would be a financial hardship for me


IntoTheMirror t1_iurrcbu wrote

Neither would be a lie. But they’re more likely to boot you if you display a specific bias.


generalraptor2002 t1_iusihsp wrote

Or wear a shirt that says “GOOGLE JURY NULLIFICATION”

That’ll definitely do the trick


curatedaccount t1_iurehzq wrote

I should tell you that a functionling legal system is so fundamentally important to the survival of our country that you should be willing to make the sacrifice to do your part.

I should tell you that if everyone with something better to do got themselves out of Jury Duty that it would make the entire system untenable and fill juries with the least capable people.

But we both know there are so many asterisks and caveats next to those statements that they're meaningless.

The legal system is clearly broken and the jury system is a failure, don't waste your time and effort trying to help it limp along.
There are a hundred surefire ways to get out of jury duty with no negative consequences, you should take advantage of them.


Jazzlike_Breadfruit9 OP t1_iurexm8 wrote

It’s one thing for me to do my part. It is another to ask me to do my part, but not be able to afford groceries for the month.


IamSauerKraut t1_iurhrc6 wrote

>It is another to ask me to do my part, but not be able to afford groceries for the month.

Absolute cogent point. Too bad it goes over the head of the self-aggrandizing, do-nothing PA Legislature.


Critical_Band5649 t1_iurk8mj wrote

Hey they are super busy passing mail in ballot laws and trying to prove their mail in ballot laws were unconstitutional.


tukekairo t1_iurkv7q wrote

Use the per diems the legislature get to set the pay


Wuz314159 t1_iurh9sk wrote

>you should be willing to make the sacrifice to do your part.

Even if that sacrifice means becoming homeless because you can no longer pay your bills? I'm one bad month away from that right now.


KFCConspiracy t1_iurr6ty wrote

I understand what you're getting at, and I think I agree with you based on that last statements about asterisks, etc.

> I should tell you that a functionling legal system is so fundamentally important to the survival of our country that you should be willing to make the sacrifice to do your part.

Unfortunately, there's a big disparity in privilege in this country. Personally, my workplace will pay me in full if I'm on a jury, so it's no skin off my back. Plus, I make enough that not being paid for a week would be inconvenient, but wouldn't really change my life significantly (Although a week's pay for me would be a significant "donation" to the legal system). But that's not an obligation for most workplaces, and most people aren't in my situation financially.

Even paying jurors minimum wage 8 hours/day * 7.25 would be a significant raise. But still wouldn't be sufficient for a lot of people to appear. Which of course, speaks to the big asterisk around why people don't want to appear.

> I should tell you that if everyone with something better to do got themselves out of Jury Duty that it would make the entire system untenable and fill juries with the least capable people.

Having served on a jury, I can tell you first hand, this is already going on. We were hearing a child sex trafficking case, and one of the (male) jurors tried to argue that the victim (15 at the time) might have wanted to be a prostitute.


P3as_And_Carrots t1_iurj9nf wrote

If the courts don’t wish to compensate jurors fairly, then there should at least be a requirement for businesses to pay their employees when they are called for service. It’s not like it would happen very often.


opaquedaybreak t1_iurk3yu wrote

I always say I am prejudicial against police and that I will inform other jurors of their right to jury nullification. Never called back.


InsaneAss t1_iurl8hc wrote

Your comment for some reason made me pronounce “prejudicial” in my head as “pre-judicial”. Then when I realized the mispronunciation I suddenly had a better meaning of the word prejudice. Pre-judge.

Obviously I already knew what it meant, I just never thought of it that way.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk.


Mijbr090490 t1_ius2nfe wrote

I did the same thing. They made me sit in the courthouse basement (waiting area for jury duty) for a week. Sorry, I won't be offering a guilty verdict for drug offenses.


toadfan64 t1_iusz2yq wrote

How many times have you used that line? I’ve never been called, but I’ll definitely be using something like that if so.


alitanveer t1_iutr3k5 wrote

I've used it in PA and it worked. It was a question on the form they made us all fill out and asked if you're less likely to trust the word of a police officer because they're a police officer. I said yes and got excluded. I regret saying that though. The case was interesting. A guy overdosed on heroin and they charged the dealer with murder.


DerHoggenCatten t1_iurviml wrote

You can be excused from serving due to financial hardship if your work doesn't pay you for that time and you can't afford to take the hit (most people can't). You are correct that it isn't a fair representation because of this.


minionoperation t1_iurudc5 wrote

I have only gotten one notice when I lived in Philadelphia, never got one since I’ve been in Montgomery county. I would gladly do it as my employer pays full salary while on jury duty. I think up to 3 weeks - not sure if longer. I do wonder who makes up juries when I don’t often hear people I know ever serving. I also wonder why I’ve only been asked 1 time in almost 20 years!


Redlar t1_iurxskb wrote

Please, take mine! I've lived in PA for nearly 20 years, I've been summoned four or five times at this point. I've always attended but this time I've asked my doctor for a medical exemption. I'm a housewife btw


jshrdd_ t1_iurorns wrote

It's class warfare on the working class population.


NoTradeClause19 t1_iurtjg9 wrote

Luckily I get paid by my law firm to sit for a jury. But unfortunately, I get eliminated because I work in a law firm. Go figure.


Slightlyjacked t1_ius9i1x wrote

I went the one year they summoned me after that I just threw the jury duty requests out and acted like I never saw em. Nothing Came of it.


da_london_09 t1_iutkm99 wrote

Same.... I've gotten several, tossed them.... if they want proof, maybe they should send them certified?


Liv4lov t1_iuwd2x7 wrote

I thought you can get fine up to $500 or jail time for this?


da_london_09 t1_iuwkvv8 wrote

Sure... just as soon as they have any proof that I ever received their letter. I think they have bigger fish to go after these days.


Liv4lov t1_iuwpe1h wrote

If you don't mind me asking, how many times can you get away with doing this and face any repercussions?


TheInnerHam t1_iurs5cq wrote

The average household income in Pa is $63000 which translates to $32.29 an hour. That's what jurors should be paid, and the cost of the jury should be fined to the losing party to decrease the burden on the tax payers.


Meatwad1313 t1_iutn7fs wrote

My one take away from jury duty was if this is a collection of my peers, my god I never want to be accused of a crime.


Prestigious-Buy1774 t1_iurm30c wrote

You are absolutely right! It has been this way for years.... I was fortunate enough to have an employer that paid the difference, But not everyone Is that fortunate. That's a very big hit in a monthly income


FairyFlossPanda t1_iurrrrz wrote

Have a panic attack and cry a lot while you're there. I got batch dismissed so I can't guarentee that it works but I said fuck it anxiety on full display no masking it see if they want me.


Pa17325 t1_ius7ctd wrote

$10 for a day is absolutely absurd. No wonder 95% of people find a way to weasel out of it


almost40fuckit t1_ius1spd wrote

I throw those letters out without opening them. Not doing jury duty, especially for $10/day. You want me to do my “civic duty” match my daily pay or pound sand.


curatedaccount t1_iuszdm8 wrote

> “civic duty”

Nothing makes me want to ditch Jury Duty more than the fact it's called a 'duty'.

If I didn't agree to do it, it ain't my fucking duty.

You actually want me to do you a favor, for free, while acting like I'm your servant in the process.
Pound sand indeed.


HI_Handbasket t1_ius5122 wrote

My wife was in between jobs for a few months, and tried to volunteer for jury duty, to give her something to do. Nope, they don't accept volunteers. I guess they don't want "professional" jurors, or people who seek to get on juries for possibly suspicious reasons.


StassiMae75 t1_iusa5aw wrote

I got called for jury duty in McKean County and the judge explained how if we were picked, we would get 9.00 a day, and those that didnt get picked (i was one that didnt) got 34.00. Make it make sense


demityph t1_iusdjeo wrote

oh yeah its absolutely absurd. when my dad lived in nj, he got paid like 150 for the two days vs me getting 25 bucks. i will note that you can use not being able to make rent or serving being a financial burden on you as an excuse to get exempted from jury duty. i saw someone do it when i was summoned earlier this month.


xjmetallium t1_iush7vw wrote

So reading this, it reminds me of a friend in Australia. She told me jury duty can pay up to 150(96usd) a day! Civic duty or not, not paying your jury people should be a crime cause no job pays for anyone being out on jury duty, so we all get boned!


reverendsteveii t1_iusizda wrote

Looks like it's time to teach everyone the Litany Against Jury Duty:

"Due to the unreliability of witnesses and the moral abhorrence of sending an innocent person to prison, if selected I will exercise my right to jury nullification and vote to acquit without regard to either the law or the facts of the case."

I'm not against participating in a free and fair society but they've ignored what we need to do so for so long that if I caught two weeks of jury duty I'd literally lose my house. To me that means it's time to subvert the system.


ISwearImKarl t1_iusqlda wrote

I don't see how I could be a fair juror if I'm just trying to gtfo. I imagine, just like in 12 angry men, most people would say whatever just to get it over with.


da_london_09 t1_iutkfvm wrote

I've always ignored the jury duty letters. They have zero proof that I ever received them.... must have got lost in the junk mail...


Double-Wear5980 t1_iuty3e0 wrote

I have never known anyone who got in trouble for just not going lol


BigDoggiefillsthebox t1_iuvom67 wrote

What really happens if you just don’t show up? Anyone have any repercussions for not showing


szydski1 t1_iuwdtux wrote

i have the same question, the city is too fucked up to be wasting resources on why bryan never showed up to jury


Dredly t1_iurn8tx wrote

and trials can go WAY longer, all shit luck on which trial you end up with.


It badly needs fixed, but I don't think anyone in power actually gives a shit. Numerous bills have attempted to fix it, but for some unknown reason, they never get passed


surrrah t1_iurqi8q wrote

Juries should just be a paying job imo.


NoJudgies t1_iusd4m4 wrote

You don't see how being a full-time chooser of guilty vs not guilty would be an issue? This is the dumbest take I've seen this week. Thank you.


surrrah t1_iut1kcr wrote

Yeah and we are trusting random people with their own prejudices, who have no knowledge of the law to decide if people go to prison or not.


NoJudgies t1_iut2wmn wrote

... that's the whole point of a jury. A jury of your peers, who get to decide if you're guilty. It's in the constitution. I wouldn't want someone whose gets paid to prosecute people deciding if I'm guilty or not. Do you listen to yourself?


surrrah t1_iuu2dmt wrote

I don’t trust my peers? Lol

And idk why I you think they would be incentivized to prosecute? Ideally there wouldn’t be any bias towards guilty or not or whatever.


NoJudgies t1_iuu9fc2 wrote

People elect judges based on number of prosecutions. It's sad but true. It's something judges tout to make themselves look tough on crime. If someone wants to look tough on crime, they're not going to choose innocent over guilty most of the time


UnaffiliatedOpinion t1_iuuambe wrote

Random people are going to be far less prejudiced than the people who would apply to be full time jurors.

The pay will no doubt be shit, so the only people who will apply to do the job would be people with no discernible skills, or people who are motivated by some biased agenda (“cleaning up the streets” by always siding with guilty verdict, or “defying the police” by always returning not guilty verdict, or even more complex types of bias). Anyone who has skills would sell those skills to a much much higher bidder.


Mail540 t1_ius0vya wrote

Not even enough to cover lunch for the day


nouveau_user t1_iusu8fu wrote

FYI - every jury I've been on, if it went over a certain time - I think 1pm - they had lunch delivered. Not a good lunch, but sandwiches and stuff.


Mijbr090490 t1_ius2fmo wrote

I was lucky my employer paid my wages during jury duty about 6 years ago and let me keep the money from the state. It really sucks for those that don't get paid. I thought I would get out of it by mentioning jury nullification but they had me sit in the basement of the Harrisburg Courthouse for a week.


kworkbos t1_ius2utl wrote

I'm sure that the court and prosecutors don't mind keeping out the kind of people who may be financially impacted by the loss of work.


-I_I t1_iusfw33 wrote

Who ever thinks that trials are fair is a moron.


generalraptor2002 t1_iusj0at wrote

Still better than the Japanese system where “Due Process” isn’t a thing


contagiousaresmiles t1_iuspy6a wrote

Highest paid legislator, lowest paid minimum wage, housing, financial aid. Crooks and thieves! Oh dont go you'll have to pay major fines and fees if not through into jail. Then they want our votes. Hahahaha


belgiumwaffles t1_iusym0s wrote

That's why I always respond stating it would hit me financially as my reason for being unable to serve. I think they summoned me 4 times so far in my life but I've never had to go thanks to that reason.


Altruistic-Rip4364 t1_iutipe1 wrote

I’ve heard it said “you don’t want to be judged by people not smart enough to get out of jury duty”

And yes, I went to jury duty


tailspin64 t1_iutmedk wrote

Id tell them you cant afford to do this for a week. You dont get paid and tell them all the financials. I bet they let you go


Guntcher1423 t1_iutmnm6 wrote

You would think that they would at the least let you collect UE for the time on jury duty.


ronreadingpa t1_iuu3p7h wrote

Everyone involved except the jurors get paid full rate. Judge, prosecutors, lawyers, law enforcement, expert witnesses, clerical staff, bailiffs, etc. If it's truly a "duty", they too should work for 1940s pay rates.

Easiest way to be exempted beforehand is "Financial Hardship", which for many is the truth. $9 per day ($25 starting the 4th day) is appalling. 17 cents milage and no paid meals, though parking may be free.

Jury nullification is another way. If doing this directly, keep it discreet. Better to mention it on a questionnaire. Some try to use the "don't trust police", etc excuse, but that surprisingly doesn't always work.

Another way is being overly well dressed. Suit and tie along with high-end shoes, etc. For a civil trial is a toss-up, but for a criminal trial, can be pretty effective from what I've been told.

Ultimately it comes down to the population of a particular county and case load. In some, a large proportion of civil cases never get to court and many criminal defendants pleading out. Less cases, less chance of being called let alone serving. Also, more likely ignored jury duty notices won't be pursued and being excused will be easier.


kshucker t1_iuu4731 wrote

I got summoned once for jury duty. I live 3 blocks from the courthouse and walked there. I made sure my travel pay for “driving” there was paid.

In hindsight, I should said I I took a bus but lost my ticket and made up an excuse for them to refund me paying for the bus because. Would have gotten paid more. Could have even said I road my bike that had an already flat tire but the flat occurred on the way in to get my flat fixed. I could go on with ways to fuck them out of their money.

Edit: anybody that gets upset with this doesn’t know how to fuck a system that is already fucking you.


printer_go_brrr t1_iuvo8uu wrote

Using this logic: If you’re born into a family in poverty, it’s OK to steal. If you’re sexually abused as a child, it’s OK to sexually abuse.

You’re just a bad person.


szydski1 t1_iuudy4w wrote

don’t go, they don’t do shit about it


Dovvol79 t1_iuuhgnf wrote

I got summoned once and told them my work didn't pay for my time being there and claimed financial hardship and got excused.


Kamarmarli t1_iuump2m wrote

Horrible. Just tell them during voir dire that you’ll be so worried about making ends meet and feeding your kids if you’re picked, that you will have a hard time concentrating on the trial.


Deacon_Blues1 t1_iuuqkpu wrote

Play the crazy card at jury selection, just say I enjoy watching murder porn on the ID channel.


markaritaville t1_iuuxw3k wrote

most good companies are still paying the employee


RUIN_NATION_ t1_iuv92nv wrote

thankfully mine was canceled but last time I did jury duty i wasnt fucking paid. I should be paid what my job pays me esp now with inflation being crazy gas being up food being up


nepaguy001 t1_iuvilzj wrote

I thought your employer has to pay you for the day?? I guess not?


axeville t1_iv64z87 wrote

Employers should be required to fund jury duty. The employee has a legal notice to prove the demand for service. Same as getting called up for N guard duty. Protect the job.


dotcom-jillionaire t1_iusevh9 wrote

it's above the state minimum wage!

which is still unbelievably pathetic


4moves t1_iurpo2v wrote

i throw it out every time. like right into the garbage. its so easy. like i grab it. and then i put it in the can. i once got a letter that was like "we know you received jury duty, and you'll be punished blah blah blah". threw that out too. i aint got time for this bullshit. find some Karen that doesn't mind destroying lives.


KenMacMillan123 t1_iury547 wrote

You get your full pay from work.


KenMacMillan123 t1_iuryih2 wrote

Nevermind, you need a better job.


31November t1_ius6x2w wrote

You people say this over and over.

As a person who went from being a nobody to being “essential” to being called greedy for unionizing, all you “just get a better job” types are absolutely just bootlicking the rich without any real policy ideas.

Fuck off.


discogeek t1_iurgng9 wrote

It's not a fair trial for the jury; it's a fair trial for the accused. You're obligated as a member of society to participate, and (supposedly) every class / race / orientation / ideology is required to participate.

That's how things work. Everything else in your post honestly is just complaining. We don't do jury duty for the benefit of the jury, we do it to keep a civil society.


JediLion17 t1_iurkc8l wrote

You really think a jury full of people worried about paying their bills because they are missing work to be on the jury doesn’t hurt the accused?

You can’t have a sound and rational jury while forcing those serving on the jury to go days without their normal wages. They will do everything they can to reach a conclusion ASAP.


discogeek t1_iurmows wrote

You can get out of jury duty for hardship reasons. All you seem to be doing is making up excuses for not fulfilling your civic duty.


JediLion17 t1_iurs8bo wrote

I’m not making excuses for myself. Did you think you were responding to the OP?

And if one can get out of jury duty for financial hardship then we really don’t have trial by a jury of your peers, we have trial by a jury of the wealthy.


Jazzlike_Breadfruit9 OP t1_iurjsqp wrote

How is the accused supposed to get a fair trial when lots of people financially cannot take the time off? That takes away a lot of working folks, which skews the fairness.


InsaneAss t1_iurlm30 wrote

You make it sound like everyone with a financial hardship is getting excused from duty. That’s far from the case.


Jazzlike_Breadfruit9 OP t1_iurn1ai wrote

Agreed, but when the jury deliberates don’t you think some people might agree to a verdict so they don’t have to report back for more days if they really need money?


KFCConspiracy t1_iurs6hc wrote

Where there's a will there's a way. "Fuck the police" "Jury nullification" "I think more crimes should have the death penalty" "You know why saudi arabia has less stealing? They still cut hands off"


IamSauerKraut t1_iuri1ni wrote

>We don't do jury duty for the benefit of the jury, we do it to keep a civil society.

Now do this in the context of the PA legislature which gets a 2nd recent large pay increase this upcoming year.


P3as_And_Carrots t1_iurizt5 wrote

So… it’s not okay to complain about the possibility of not getting one week worth of wages?? Bruh…


KFCConspiracy t1_iurs0sm wrote

If all the accused can get is the dumbest motherfuckers around and retirees with nothing better to do, that isn't really a fair trial for the accused.


minneapple79 t1_iurvgzy wrote

Not sure why you're getting downvoted. If a person on this board is ever accused of a crime, he or she will have the right to a trial by a jury of their peers. That's what we are all taking part in as part of our democracy.

If you can't afford to go for jury duty, note that when you fill out your form.


EmpiricalAnarchism t1_ius8xv9 wrote

And knowing that the state is the one that brings charges, why would I vote to convict based on their evidence when they think so little of my time and expertise that it’s worth barely more than a dollar an hour? County solicitors and judges are extremely well paid despite PA’s courts being a lawless, arbitrary, and capricious institution.