AS good excuse for jury duty??

Post Reply New Topic

I would be horrible at being a juror. First off, i believe i have social anxiety (which i really need to get treated and really, dx'd), so i wouldn't be any help...being all quiet, not giving my opinion. Second, i am liable to just copy someone else's response or just agree with them. It takes a lot of thought to come up with my own opinions or putting facts together when you bunch that with social anxiety. I wouldn't be able to give a fair answer. I am sure the phrase "idk" would come up a lot.

That being said, i was called for jury duty and i did go. I was so nervous, i was sweating and kinda shaking. There were like 100 people there. I about made a fool of myself and made the whole place laugh...they were taking attendance and as soon as they were about to call my name, i said "here." I knew my name was next because of the long pause. Then the person calling the names laughed (with everyone else) and said something stupid like having everyone say here before their names were called. I was very lucky that day. The entire group was dismissed because they didn't need us and we all got our papers saying we don't have to serve again for X amount of years and got our $16, i think it was.

So, i would say if you can't then don't and see if you can be excused. Some people really like doing this. Some people don't, but really have no choice. Others, would not be a good candidate for the job at all, being that they have a medical condition or the like.

I have always been excused from juror duty, simply because I require a note taker. I am also told that require means I am not fit to serve, as I may have trouble with facts or details important to a case. I can also state that no matter what you presented to me you would not be able to convince "Me" of a persons guilt beyond a shadow of doubt (Therefore there is no trial I would give a guilty verdict for). I would also never render a verdict with out the ability of my self being able to cross-examine both the members of prosecuting and defense. Nor could I get over the fact, that the prosecutions is there to produce a guilty verdict, however, at the same time was the only one really able to produce evidence it would seem to me that is a conflict of interest in itself. I would thus see, it a probably cause that the prosecution could have simply constructed a case, to advance there own career (That is not an unreasonable assumption to me). That's also why I think the prosecution should be cross examined (Weight there attitude in a case) and evidence always being allowed to be reviewed by a third party, if those are not meet for the defense, how do I know the police, and prosecution just didn't construct a case especially if it was to cover something they were possible at fault for?

I am actually wondering how many of you replying would actually be able to be convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt of a crime actually taking place that would be an interesting poll. I know you can't convince me of anything based off another option. Unless I can conduct an experiment that proves what you say.

Even if I could be excused from civic duty by merit of my disability, I would not request it. Jury duty is one of the few ways I can give back to my country, seeing as I'm not fit for military or police work, and I'm not subtle enough to run for office. Of course, depending on the case I might not even get the chance to be a juror, seeing as I have an oddly even-handed view of justice that most jury selectors would not like. But should the call come, I will answer it.

If you actually think you'd break down or be incapable of understanding what was going on in the trial, then it's a reasonable excuse. If you would just be uncomfortable, however, I would say consider this - if you were on trial for something, would you want the entire jury to be NTs?

I have been called but never served (wasn't picked), but my father did, and the stories he told about the willingness of his fellow jurors to judge on the basis of the defendant's behavior or on their personal biases or on a desire to just be done with it was terrifying. Another commenter described her ordeal on a jury but also mentioned how in the end she may have helped the defendant to receive a slightly more just sentence than he might have otherwise. People who see things a bit differently and make their judgments on a different basis (and in the case of people with AS, typically a more fact-based one) really have an important place in the justice system. They can help keep people from serving jail time for completely stupid reasons, and perhaps see through the charming people who never seem to be punished no matter how obvious it is that they have committed a crime. If you think you can physically and mental handle it, I'd say do it. If not, you can try to get out of it and see how your luck is (I was once told that the fact I was in college in another state and would not be present at the time of the summons was not good enough... although they never did anything to me as a result of that...)

jury selection depends on what kind of jury they are looking for. They might be looking for someone with or without the mixed bag of AS.

I told them that I was pregnant and I had really bad morning sickness (which was true) and I had to be able to leave to throw up. That worked.

Also, Be extreme with your views. that helps

I think that I would be very unsuitable for Jury duty. Not only would it leave me an emotional wreck for months if not longer, I would also be probably unable to make a decision of that nature.

I have served on circuit Court jury a couple of times and the second time, I was called in to sit in on what I found out to be a sentencing hearing of someone who likely robbed a store, murdered someone or caused some form of local illegal mayhem.
I was literally sitting across the room from this man and I was getting anxiety just by looking at him. So of course when the time came, I had to disclose my Autism. And the judge as well as the prosecution team had no problem with it and let me go.

I know this thread is 10 years old but I've been meaning to ask about this. I'm scared I'll be called for jury service one day, and I often wonder if I'll get let off if I have a diagnosis of AS and ADHD.

Mind you, my brother was called for jury service about 8 years ago (before he got diagnosed with AS), and he told them he suffered with depression and anxiety, and they let him off. I can't remember if he had to go to get a note from the doctor or not.

I don't think I'd be very good at it.

I'm so impaired with social anxiety/autism that I don't even need to do the interview for disability benefits. My mum is my advocate instead.

So I'm probably too immature for it.

If I did it I'd let them off because I'm gullible. Or something about them would annoy me and possibly have nothing to do with guilt or innocence so I'd get them sent down. Not saying this would be moral, just saying that's what my knee jerk reactions would be. Possibly I'd be right but you shouldn't do this kind of thing based on hunches.

This topic is always current, so it's a good one.

I was called for jury duty about ten years ago which was long before my diagnosis. As someone else said, so many people in the one room and the uncertainty of the situation was difficult, but I was willing to persevere.

The DA gave the details of the case as the judge presided with the defendant (a white male) and his defense attorney present. The judge said he was going to go around the room once the details were given as ask each person if there was any reason they could not be impartial.

Details: the defendant was arrested inside his home. The home contained drug paraphernalia and there was drug paraphernalia as well as crystal meth on the coffee table in front of him. There was also the same drug found in the defendant's pants pocket. The defendant alleged that the drugs were not his and if I recall, said he had no idea they were in his pocket......

One person said they were related to him as was excused. A few others were excused but I don't remember why.

The judge got to me. I said I could not be impartial. I said based on the facts given, I could not be convinced that he wasn't guilty. The judge said something like: "Do you mean to tell me that would not be capable of having an open mind enough to listen to both arguments for this person impartially to make an informed decision?!" He sounded angry and his voice was louder. I said: "Yes, your honor, that's what I'm saying." The judge was silent for about five seconds....then he said. "You're dismissed."

Black and white thinking on my part?

I found out later from a man who I went to the same church with at the time who DID get picked that the defendant got off on a technicality but.........was arrested shortly after on a......drug charge.

I felt like that jury day and based on the facts of that particular case I was called for, that the defendant was wasting everyone's time. I felt like everyone probably felt the same way I did but it was all a charade. A game we were all playing as adults because I felt the person should have done the right thing and confess his guilt.

The best excuse for getting out of jury duty I've found so far is to say something like..

"Based on the charges and what both sides have already said during this selection process, I have already reached the opinion that the defendant is guilty of __________. Also, from my own personal experiences with people who have committed that (those) particular crime(s), I can honestly say that they all used the exact same excuses that the defense counsel has just now stated. So, your Honor, I cannot state with a clear conscience that I could render a fair judgement of the case at hand."

The last time, it was a young man charged with both DUI and drunk driving. Not only did the judge dismiss me, but he dismissed several other candidates who had not yet been interviewed.