OT again...jury duty!

[Galadriel]

Hey all,

Nope I haven't been called in for this, but I was thinking about
it, and well basically if you are called in and don't have a good
excuse, then you are at the "mercy" of the court for however long the
trial takes.



Well what I think about is okay us being emets, and many of us having
IBS too on top if it, me included, I don't think being made to sit in a
court room for hours on end without free access to a bathroom wouldn't
be good! Has anyone had to deal with this experience?



I can just see having an IBS attack when they are in the middle of
doing what it is attourneys/lawyers/judges do and not being allowed to
leave the room for another 2 hours (NOT!) Ack!

</font></span>

[californiagirl]

Wow, I never thought of that! Scary! Personally, I would LOVE to go to Jury Duty. I am a Freelance Paralegal going to law school, so I'm kinda "twisted" in thinking it'd be such a learning experience[img]smileys/smilies_01.gif[/img]

[crimgoddess]

I pretty much have an automatic out for jury duty. I'm ideologically opposed to prisons, and would refuse to vote guilty if the end result would be a prison sentence. I'm guessing that this will keep me out of the juryroom for awhile


For me it's not the sitting still, or not having access to a bathroom that would bother me- I just don't think I would be able to stay quiet during the process, and would probably start questioning the questions of the prosecution, haha


*amber*Edited by: crimgoddess

[suze]

A friend of mine has just been called for jury service. Although I'd find it interesting, I would worry about not being able to leave. If I'm in any situation where I feel trapped, then the panic starts. This is one of those situations which I would dread.


Now, I know this might spark some highly-charged debate, and so I'll apologise in advance! But I was wondering Amber, for what reason are you (ideologically) opposed to prison? Please PM me if you'd rather answer in private for fear of a backlash! I'm open-minded really, but you're an intelligent gal, and I'd like to hear your opinion, and your views on any alternatives!

[luna33]

Hi,


There's a place on the jury duty form you get where you can state if there's a reason you can't do it, and I think they're pretty lenient in letting people out. Twice I wrote that I couldn't attend--my reasons being (the first time) that I was breastfeeding and couldn't be away from my babyand (the second time) that I was a stay-at-home mom and had no one to watch my child. I was excused both times, no problem. I would just write on the form, "I have IBS and a phobia that prohibits me from being confined in a small room without access to a bathroom" or something of that nature.


Mind you, I'm not advocating doing that unless you truly are worried about that (as you seem to be). I have served jury duty several times and will do so again next time I'm called, now that my child's in school. But they probably will let you out of it if you can't do it for a good reason.

[crimgoddess]

&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;Now, I know this might spark some highly-charged debate, and so I'll apologise in advance! But I was wondering Amber, for what reason are you (ideologically) opposed to prison? Please PM me if you'd rather answer in private for fear of a backlash! I'm open-minded really, but you're an intelligent gal, and I'd like to hear your opinion, and your views on any alternatives!&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;


I have no problem answering this on the forum It may start some debate, but I after studying criminology and working in the field for almost six years, for me there is really no other way to think.


If someone would have told me before I started my education that prisons should be abolished- I would have thought they were crazy. But now I see that prisons themselves simply exacerbate an already bad situation, and make it more likely that the person re-offend.


Two of the most compelling arguments for prisons is that they are needed to both punish and deter. That people would learn that 'hey, prison is bad' and not want to end up there again (which is specific deterrence), and that others will see these people go to prison and say 'damn, I don't want to end up there' (general deterrence). However, this doesn't work in preventing crime. Think about it- if this were true, the United States, which has the highest incarceration rate in the world, some of then harshest penalties, and prisons that contravene many human rights (think Abu Ghraib but with American prisoners- and less likely to make the news)- would have the lowest crime rates. But they don't.


If anything- it makes people more likely to learn tools by which they can become better criminals. If you think about it- who gets sent to prison? Those who get caught. Who gets caught? People who aren't that good at comitting crime. BUT, once in awhile someone who is VERY good at what they do gets caught- and when inside, can teach some of the more petty 'criminals' (I am uncomfortable with using this term- I dont like to label marginalized people) how to up their ante. Become better at comitting crime without being caught.


Although many people don't care- the environment within a prison is very violent and damaging. So you might think "good! they comitted the crime so they deserve to be punished!"- but here is a question, would you rather punish people, or make it more likely that they won't re-offend? Because believe me, those two don't go hand in hand. People who are made to live in violent, instable surroundings can not only develop mental health problems and become suicidal (the suicide and self-mutilation rates for women in prison are astronomical)- but they can also lash out and become violent, even if their offences were non-violent. As one prisoner put it- if you lock a dog up in a cage and poke it repeatedly with a stick and then let that dog out- it's going to bite someone.


You may think- 'hey, prison is good because it provides treatment'. Well, most of the US has resorted to a warehousing model, so no treatment for them. In Canada, where there is a heavy emphasis on rehabilitation- treatment is OVER prescribed. However, when you think about it- how are the ideals of treatment supposed to be effective, when for the other 20-22 hours of the day it is reinforced that these individuals are s***? My masters thesis centres around the experiences of Sex Offenders while incarcerated- this is a problem identified in the literature.


People have been saying that prisons don't work since they were first built- sociologists, people of religion, government researchers, etc- but they remain because they are a popular option. If any politician were to seriously speak about abolishing prisons, then it's political suicide. People prefer to believe that by sending someone to prison- they are being suitably punished, and crime will go down....however, the conditions that are conducive to crime (large disparity between the rich and the poor, inequality, confining those of a low socioeconomic status to ghettos which ma

[crazybeautiful]

I was summoned for jury duty. I told them I was in school full time and wouldn't be able to serve and I didn't have to!

[sillygirl]

I was summond for this comming Wednesday. I called to question the fact that I was called in my maiden name (I've been married for 2 1/2 years) and they told me I would still have to go. Then she said "unless you have some medical condition that would prohibit you from serving?" I said that I was pregnant, but I could still come if I needed to. SHe asked when I was due and I told her, then she said she would excuse me! I was shocked! I didn't think it would be that easy to get out of it, but I'm glad I did. [img]smileys/smilies_01.gif[/img]

[jesskali]

I served on the Grand Jury for my county for 12 months last year. We met once per month and determine whether certain cases needed to go to court. I have IBS and the bathroom thing was an occasional problem, but usually I was fine. We would have to sit in a small court room for anywhere from 2-6 hours depending on how many cases we had that day. Overall, I enjoyed it and would do it again in a minute. It was one day per month that I didn't have to go to work!

Jess

[ontariogirl]

Well here in Ontario, Canada, my doctor filled out a form telling them that I can't participate in jury duties at all. That has been my fear of having an attack while sitting there. So now I don't have to worry about being called!

[babygap5]

Amber, just a quick question. Do you have any suggestions as to how to rehabilitate people who commit murders, rape, etc. if you disagree w/ prison? What happens if you CAN'T prevent crime? What kind of punishments do you think would rehabilitate a person?

[crimgoddess]

Well- rehabilitation and prison are actually two separate issues. Prisons don't rehabilitate- if they did, recidivism rates wouldn't be what they are.


&lt;&lt;What kind of punishments do you think would rehabilitate a person?&gt;&gt;


This is actually a bit of a contradiction; you can't rehabilitate someone via punishment. A punitive environment reinforces not only the idea that what they did was wrong (which, or course, I wont argue with)- but also that the person is bad, unworthy, and worthless. Research has proven that in order for any sort of rehabilitative treatment to be beneficial, the person needs to develop a sense of self-worth, self-esteem, and the desire to live a productive goal-oriented life. In prison, especially if you are a sex offender, what is reinforced is that you are s*** and dont deserve to life- often they are put in protective custody because their lives have been threatened. Not to mention prison is probably one of the most volatile, violent environments- where people often act out violently as a pre-emptive strike to prevent victimization. How is treatment supposed to be effective while incarcerated, if for the other 22 hours of the day they have to put up with this?


It is often suggested that segregation from the public is needed for a brief amount of time directly following the crime and sentencing- to properly assess what the individual needs, and provide a sort of stabilizing environment. Afterwards, community based approaches are more beneficial. I hesitate to give a distinct plan- because it is easy to discard it as irrelevant or not being able to work- or to absorb it to the current system, and allow for the incarceration of more people (I can name several projects which ended this way- much to the chagrin of many criminologists/researchers.)


It's funny that you mention both rapists and murderers- because those two populations actually have the lowest recidivism rates, especially when given access to treatment. And I also work with both I refuse to believe that anyone is disposable.


The thing is- we have to be careful not to judge the entire prison population by those big names that you hear in the media- Bernardo, Gacy, Manson- these are the extreme minority, and are often used to justify a lot of what is done policy wise. Let's put it this way- say I met one American, who was rude, abrasive, and generally a horrible person. What if I then, in turn, decided that all Americans were horrible people, and that I didn't want them in my country. Would that be fair?


I think part of the problem is how we view people who commit crimes. I read an article last year that contrasted two similar situations. One wasthe instance where the two boys in England (10? 12 years old?) killed a 3 year old. The public wanted these boys in prison for the rest of their lives, and basically called for their blood. A similar situation occured in the Netherlands- and the response was to view it as a tragedy for all parties involved. They not only felt sympathy for the family of the murdered child- but also for the perpetrators and THEIR family. They viewed the murder of a child at the hands of another as a tragedy all around, and wanted to know both why this happened, and what could be done for the perpetrator. In the US, they get sentenced to death (Between 1990 and 2003 19 individuals under the age of eighteen were executed- the US executes more child offenders than any other country)


Hope this helps explain what I mean-


*amber*
Edited by: crimgoddess

[suze]

Hi Amber, read your posts with real interest, and you know, you make some good points. The prisons in the UK are vastly over-crowded and there are many people in them who might be better off doing what we call "community work" here, to give them a sense of purpose at least. There have been a number of tv progs on recently highlighting initiatives which match community work with the interests of the offender and it's amazing how, by giving these people an opportunity to do something they enjoy and find worthwhile, they reallydo have a different outlookon life- there was one in particular who loved dogs, so they put him to work in the local dog rescue centre. He's now a full-time, trusted employee, good at his job, and feeling good about himself. Some police forces have also set up a system whereby the offenders meet with their victims, and they get to hear first hand the effects of the crime. This seems to work especially well with young offenders who often don't think about theeffects of what they do, only the 'buzz' from doing it. They are usually full of shame and remorse afterwards.


Obviously, the problem with sex offenders, muderers etc., is that thesubject in itself is so emotive.And we know so little about why the offenders do whatthey do; perhaps if we understood it more, we'dfeel less inclined to bang them up for 15 years. I have to admit that my gut feeling is that certain types of crime require the removal of individuals from society, obviously serial killers,and terrorists too...I feel strongly in the latter instance because the riskto society as a whole is comparatively greater. I'm not saying my views are right, it's just how I feel.


I'm interested in your views on sex offenders...a couple of weeks ago a 3 year old girl wasabducted from her home, about a mile away from me, by a 27 year old man,and raped. A 3 year old for Christ's sake....now the public is going to take a lot of convincing that this man, who was caught thankfully, does not deserve anything other than to be locked up for a long time.There was also the Soham murders a few years back, where a school caretakerinvited two 10 year old girls into his house and murdered them...he had a string of sex offences behind him but used bogus id to get the job. These are highly publicised cases, I know, which may force us to take a tougher view than necessary,butit's important that we never lose sightof who the victim is in all of this. And I know you say that sex offenders and murderers are the least likely to reoffend, but some do right? How do you know who will and who won't? Who is accountable when things go wrong again? I'm sure the prison system as it is is not good, but there has to be a halfway house here I think.


Anyway, Idon't have your experience on this, I'm just speaking as a bog-standard member of the public! You make a good case though,andexpressed with your usual eloquence - you really will make a cracking academic sometime soon!


BTW, the case you mentioned was James Bulger, a three year old abducted, tortured, strapped to a railway line and left to die, by two 10 year olds. They had attempted a previous abduction of a twoyear old earlier that day. They served 8 years andtheir release caused public outrage. The kids though had had quite destructive upbringings themselves and violence wassadly part and parcel of their young lives. I think there were definitely some who, although appalled at the atrocity of the crime, did wonder what must have gone so terribly wrong in the lives of these young boys to lead them to do such a thing, feeling that what they needed was love, understanding, help, stabilityetc. rather than be locked up for the rest of their lives.


Anyway girlie, take care!

[crimgoddess]

Hey Suze-


You are completely right. Part of the problem is this topic is SO close to home. Most people really can't remain impartial when it comes to this issue, or even assess the facts. Because of this- some are even unwilling to view the research on this topic, or explain it away as being irrelevant. This came as a slap in the face to me when I went to a town hall meeting over the summer about a parole office that is now in my neighbourhood. My neighbours were up in arms, convinced that their children were going to be raped and mugged (even though no individuals whose offences were sexual in nature of against children will be using that office)- and that all ex-offenders reoffend. When we tried to mention some of the research on the topic, and of course the logic that if these individuals were going to re-offend- they sure as hell wouldn't do it right in front of their PO- we were told "you don't know anything- you don't have children". Which we found somewhat amusing, because some of the people who were presenting our position DID have kids.


Some may find this strange- but in the same way that we have thinking errors due to our emet- many sex offenders also have damaging thinking errors in relation to sex and sexuality. I did a placement in a psychiatric hospital for four months with a doctor who specialized in the treatment of sex offenders- i sat in and participated in both group and individual therapy sessions, and spent time with those who were on the locked ward.Many of his patients were abused themselves as children, and not all necessarily viewed it as a negative experience. So, if you were in a sexual relationship at age 8 or 9 with an older teen/adult, and viewed it as a positive 'relationship'- if you then, as an adult begin a relationship with a child that age, you might not think of what you are doing as wrong and damaging. Hey, when it happened to you, you 'liked' it- why wouldn't they? (And by 'liked' I don't necessarily mean that the sex was pleasurable- a lot of the time it's the feeling of being cared for- because of this, its hard for a kid to process the fact that they are being taken advantage of).


Other thinking errors relate to the fact that they may view certain actions by their victims as permission to commit their crime. In the same way we may see someone who looks a bit off, or is buying ginger ale and think "OMG, they are sick with a stomach virus"- they may interpret the way an adult or child is looking at them as "they are attracted to me", "they want it", etc. They can't properly interpret the social cues that they are presented with. We may think that it's crazy, and that no small child can ever 'consent' to sex- in their minds these signs are very real.I am definitely not making excuses for this type of behaviour- I'm just trying to give you an idea of where some of these people are coming from.


Yes, there are those people who are persistent offenders and have an escalating pattern of violence. However, the current system conducive to these people falling through the cracks, and not nipping it in the bud, so to speak, after they have committed their first offence. Not getting treatment/getting inconsistent treatment and living in an unstable environment makes it more likely that we will end up with more of those horrible cases you hear in the media. With effective treatment, research says that the success rate is over 90%. That gives me hope.


I think part of the issue is that people are stuck on the "well, if we get rid of prisons and the current system, what will we use?"- a very valid question. But, that does not negate the fact that the current system just isn't working. If you were giving someone medication for an illness and it was making them worse, you would stop giving it to them,even if there was no other known treatment.I view the current system much in the same way.


Suze- it's always a pleasure And thank you. I'm looking forward to being part of the next wave of critical criminologists entering th

[tayda]

I see prisons as places to put the "dangerous" or thse whom are "deserving" of punishmement in.


Due to consitutional constraints and the rights that we have as US citizens; there aren't many other alternatives at the moment.


I agree w/ Amber. Prisons are hostile, violent, and can be like a petri dish for crime. Many prisons in the US have libraries, support/rehap groups, employment, and schooling offered to the inmates that they house. Some even offer COLLEGE DEGREES... however, not all. The college degree programs spurred a backlash b/c people were FURIOUS that they were "paying for a criminal's education". So many places did away with the program.


Unless it is a "private" prison, then prison is expensive (though not nearly as costly as the death penalty). Many give the inmate time to fume, and become angrier over time. This doesn't teach the offender any lesson, as much as it does cause psychological trauma.


To make this short, I agree w/ amber.. however, until the day comes when we can electronically monitor a convicted offender's actions and where-abouts, and deliver IMMEDIATE "punishment" to him/her when they are violating their terms of punishment. Then there is not much else we can do w/ them.


Lets face it... chemical castration is only permisable in the US if the offender agrees to it. Shocking would be considered cruel and unusual.


There are just some individuals who should not be permitted to walk our streets or even have a CHANCE of it. While there are many people who are sent to prison who really shouldn't be there. (I hate the states w/ the three strikes law).


THere are some psychopaths / sociopaths who are just that and aren't able to feel compasion for anyone else, but themselves. Some would kill their kids and not think twice. While there are others who make a genuine mistake or two and could greatly benefit from the right kind rehabilitations as opposed to retribution.


Wow, that got longer than I wanted it to. I don't wanna ruffle feathers, but I just wanna say that prisons do have their place in society. But we send WAAAAY too many people there.

[crimgoddess]

hey Tayda- just wanted to clear up a few things There are a lot of misconceptions about prison floating around, so I thought I would give some info.


&lt;&lt;&lt;Many prisons in the US have libraries, support/rehap groups, employment, and schooling offered to the inmates that they house. Some even offer COLLEGE DEGREES... however, not all. The college degree programs spurred a backlash b/c people were FURIOUS that they were "paying for a criminal's education". So many places did away with the program.&gt;&gt;&gt;


Although some of this may have been true at one point in time, it's not necessarily accurate at the moment. Some prisons do have libraries- but there has been a movement in the 90s in the US to get rid of prisoner access to law books, so that they are able to learn of the process of law, their legal rights, etc. Some places like Arizona dumped all the books- others like California have ceased to update their volumes. In some areas, like Idaho, guards even stripped prisoners of the law books they have purchased themselves, with the response of "Go ahead, sue us" (knowing that it would pretty much be impossible to prove their case in court and win).


While many still have basic libraries- many utilize solely donations, which means that they arent necessarily given access to books they want to read (They are also often run through volunteer labour). Another problem is that there is a high degree of illiteracy among prisoners (approx 40%)- a lot of these people are those who literally slipped through the cracks of the school system. Not to mention they are likely to come from areas of high poverty. Finally, with overcrowding, getting access to the prison library is an issue.


Support/rehab groups- not so much anymore. There was a general belief in the 70's (with the publication of Martinson's "nothing works") and the 80s that rehabilitation simply didn't work. Most of these programs were abandoned, with the exception of some institutions which specialize. The common model in american prisons is that of warehousing. It is only in the very recent future that they have started to evaluate this, and began to re-examine rehabilitation as an option.


Work- Most work inside prison is pretty much slave labour; pays pennies and hour (15cents to 1.12$, depending on where they are incarcerated), and in many places as much as 80 percent of the prisoner's wages are taken away to pay for their 'room and board'. Proportionately, there is actually less prisoners working now then there was in 1980. There are simply too many people entering the system, and not enough positions for them.


Education- most of the degree-granting programs are long gone.Only 8 states (although my data is a few years old- may be less at this point) offer limited degree ganting programs, which are run through volunteers. If it's at all like the college courses offered in Canadian prisons (which, by the way, the inmates pay for out of their own pocket)- there can be issues related to access to materials and to the instructors. It's kind of funny that people tend to be up in arms about prisoners getting degrees while in prison- it has been shown that the more education a person receives, the less likely they are to reoffend. Generally, if more funding was given to these programs, the payback would come in lower recidivism rates, and less people getting sent back to prison.


Another huge issue relating to access to legal material are violation of prisoner rights. Imagine this- you are raped in prison by a guard- if you wanted to file a civil suit againt them for doing so- you actually have to fill out a file complaint WITH those guards! Also, you are held up to a higher burden of proof than the general public. If you don't have any tangible physical evidence (which, in sexual assault cases, you may not- depending on how long you wait to report it, and if you have access to a doctor for a medical exam), the case is dismissed.


&lt;&lt;&lt;Lets face it... chemical castration i

[tayda]

Amber, all of what you said, I know.


(we're both in Masters degree programs... mine's in CJ).. I was just trying to make it short. I wasn't offering any solutions, just stateing a few examples.


Private prisons- while they are scarey, it's easy to see why the general public would support them.


Law Books- this is true.. and if an inmate has access to them, they study them for loopholes, and prisons and states didn't like that (cutting it wicked short).


Work- while it is slave labor (where it is available) it keeps them busy. (Not the best way to put it I know)


Support/Rehab- very limited; I know.. but I find that the CJ system is like history.. it repeats itself. We'll look at different philosophies of punishments and try them.. then revert back to other methods.


Education- GED programs are the most common education program... however it is available in many correctional facilities...


Everything that you've said it true... I know... I just wanted to play a little devil's advocate. I know that prisons are not REALLY the solution, however, we need to find a "very effective" means of punishing/rehabilitating offenders. Because the public outcry would be HUGE if we experimented w/ different punishments and they reoffended. (we still get that when offenders have done their time, and reoffend when released).


I was just saying.

[kutekim1217]

Jury duty. Yuck. I suffer with mild agoraphobia and my doctor who is aware of my anxieties and agoraphobia and who prescribes Xanax for me always writes me a note that I put in with the card. There is no possible way I can travel that far and be confined with others in a room, he always wries that I have severe agoraphobia and panic attacks and is being treated by him and am unable to attend jury duty. he's had to write 2 for me so far. Is it true if you dont do the town census you wont get called?