John & Martha held by police at gun point

[roncachamp]

on what basis?

Knowledge. Easier to fool an ignorant jury.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

Normally Peremptory challenges by one side or the other.

Every time I've come into the jury pool, except for grand juries, the minute my prior LE service was noticed I got tossed out by the defense.

With your own words in this thread (only those with experience are fit to judge), was that unfair?

 

[Bob Noel]

Normally Peremptory challenges by one side or the other.

Every time I've come into the jury pool, except for grand juries, the minute my prior LE service was noticed I got tossed out by the defense.

How many peremptory challenges are allowed?

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

How many peremptory challenges are allowed?

It varies between jurisdictions, the court you're in, and the kind of case being heard. For instance, a 12-person jury in a felony case might allow each side 4 peremptories, whereas a 6-person civil jury might allow 2 peremptories.

 

[Bob Noel]

It varies between jurisdictions, the court you're in, and the kind of case being heard. For instance, a 12-person jury in a felony case might allow each side 4 peremptories, whereas a 6-person civil jury might allow 2 peremptories.

Then wouldn't be difficult for "those with experience" to be "generally excluded from jury duty"? I would expect that peremptory challenges to used for all sort of reasons, not just to keep out "those with experience".

 

[TMetzinger]

With your own words in this thread (only those with experience are fit to judge), was that unfair?

I'm thnking about this.... Are you saying that my actual experience in law enforcement makes me unfit to serve on a jury?

I can sympathize with defense attorneys who are concerned that any former cops/agents/prosecutors would "assume" that the defendant is guilty. Statistically, in the USA, that IS the way to bet, after all. But I think if questioned I'd have been able to convice a defense attorney that the evidence and testimony are what matters, and that I'd be more than willing to acquit (and peeved at the prosecutor) if he didn't prove his case.

As a note - I thought OJ was probably guilty, but I'd have acquitted him if I'd been on that jury - the state did a horrible job of prosecution.

 

[kkoran]

On Tuesday or Wednesday (this week) my hangar neighbor sent an email to the Santa Barbara police department commenting on its approach to reportedly stolen aircraft. Why are we not surprised there was no response?

He also called the King Schools' info line and relayed his best wishes to Martha & John. This afternoon he received a phone call from Martha King. She called to thank him for his concern and to mention John's comment … "It was a pretty decent landing and really didn't justify that level of a ramp check."

Why would the Santa Barbara Police Departement respond to some person in Colorado with no connection to the incident?

 

[alaskaflyer]

I'm thnking about this.... Are you saying that my actual experience in law enforcement makes me unfit to serve on a jury?

I don't think so. Neither is some housewife in Hoboken morally or legally inequipped to judge a man who ended the life of another in self defense.

 

[TMetzinger]

I don't think so. Neither is some housewife in Hoboken morally or legally inequipped to judge a man who ended the life of another in self defense.

I'll consider this and perhaps modify my views. I may have been overreacting to the "guns are evil" attitude I perceived earlier in the thread, and leaping from there to some of the nut-jobs I've heard in my neighborhood claiming that of COURSE soldiers should be tried by civilians for their "war crimes" in Iraq and elsewhere.

I really do think our criminal justice system is tops, though I wonder if we couldn't improve it a bit with the sort of automatic "gag order" that the Brits impose on the media before the trial starts.

Thanks!

 

[AuntPeggy]

Normally Peremptory challenges by one side or the other.

Every time I've come into the jury pool, except for grand juries, the minute my prior LE service was noticed I got tossed out by the defense.

I generally get excluded immediately and without debate from civil juries when I completely answer the question, "Have you or any member of your family now or in the past been party to civil litigation?" Seems like being sued or suing someone makes you biased.

Then I get excused when I fully answer this question in criminal court, "Have you or any member of your family now or in the past been incarcerated or been arrested?" Probably having sex offenders in the family and one that was killed by the police in a hostage situation increases the bias.

 

[jmcsherry]

I'll consider this and perhaps modify my views.

I really do think our criminal justice system is tops, though I wonder if we couldn't improve it a bit with the sort of automatic "gag order" that the Brits impose on the media before the trial starts.

Thanks!

I wonder if you would still hold that position if your prior experiences had been from the other side of the badge? I'm not talking about speeding tix, but about having armed people bust in the front door with guns drawn. Evidently in the 70's long hair was enough to get a warrant to search for drugs whether based in fact or not.

I have a good deal of respect for the profession of the law, but will withhold judgement on many of the practitioners, especially at the street level.

In John & Martha's case, it appears that all involved followed the procedures available to them. Probably, it would have been smarter and smoother to have waited until the occupants of the aircraft had tied it down and were walking to the terminal building - an easy and quiet apprehension would have ensued, with plenty of opportunity to check out the documents. But that's hindsight for you.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

I'm thnking about this.... Are you saying that my actual experience in law enforcement makes me unfit to serve on a jury?

....

Not at all.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

Then wouldn't be difficult for "those with experience" to be "generally excluded from jury duty"? I would expect that peremptory challenges to used for all sort of reasons, not just to keep out "those with experience".

There are also "challenges for cause." These are used when there is someone with a demonstrated inability to impartially hear a case, or for someone whose impartiality is suspect.

For instance, say there's a juror whose son was best friends with a murder victim. That person just isn't going to make it onto a jury, because he'll be "excused for cause" - he can say that he'll be impartial until he's blue in the face, and it could very well be true, but the doubt remains.

A more real-world example might be a trial where an officer from Dept. X is going to testify. Another officer from Dept. X has jury duty - he just isn't gonna make it onto the jury, because of the doubt of impartiality.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

...

I really do think our criminal justice system is tops, though I wonder if we couldn't improve it a bit with the sort of automatic "gag order" that the Brits impose on the media before the trial starts.

Thanks!

I see what you're saying, and I've had similar thoughts from time to time.

The first problem is that our trials are public. Do we want a system where a judge (the gov't) can suppress reporting on, say, a trial of the officers in this incident (let's assume - completely hypothetical - that there was a crime) at the request of the prosecutor (the gov't), because the prosecutor (the gov't) doesn't want to embarrass the police department that keeps him employed? Secret trials are a thing I associate with the Star Chamber, not with the U.S.

Second, we've got the 1st Amendment, which specifically guarantees freedom of the press.

But, yeah, I understand why you say it. My first true exposure to criminal justice, at an age where I could kind of understand what was happening, was the OJ Simpson trial....

 

[Cap'n Jack]

David-

Thank you for sharing your insights on the law to us. Also thanks for your patience.

 

[TMetzinger]

I see what you're saying, and I've had similar thoughts from time to time.

The first problem is that our trials are public. Do we want a system where a judge (the gov't) can suppress reporting on, say, a trial of the officers in this incident (let's assume - completely hypothetical - that there was a crime) at the request of the prosecutor (the gov't), because the prosecutor (the gov't) doesn't want to embarrass the police department that keeps him employed? Secret trials are a thing I associate with the Star Chamber, not with the U.S.
.

I think the way it's done in the UK is that the trial is public and reported on. But between the arrest and the trial there's a "quiet period" where nothing related to the case is published.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

I think the way it's done in the UK is that the trial is public and reported on. But between the arrest and the trial there's a "quiet period" where nothing related to the case is published.

Do we even want that, though?

Say I'm arrested of rape. There's no foundation for it whatsoever, but coincidentally I'm about to release some really embarrassing things on my website about the local prosecutor's DUI charge that was covered up by the local sheriff's department, and there's an election coming up in 7 months in which both the prosecutor and sheriff are running. Suppose the local judge is aware of this, but did nothing about it.

Suppose there's a gag order in the case that prohibits any news stories, or any access to the court files in my case, between arrest and trial. If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a noise? What incentive is there for the judge, the prosecutor, and the government in general, to make sure my right to a speedy trial (within 6 months) is vindicated? Instead, why shouldn't they just keep me locked up until the election is over, and then quietly dismiss everything?

Far fetched? Perhaps, but one of the reasons we can say that it's far-fetched is because our entire judicial system - with certain exceptions that I feel are wholly inappropriate and simply offensive to the Constitution - are open to the public.

Keep in mind that England doesn't have what I'd call a stellar record when it comes to justice. Our legal institutions, though kind-of related, are far different from England's for very good reasons.

 

[Ghery]

Keep in mind that England doesn't have what I'd call a stellar record when it comes to justice. Our legal institutions, though kind-of related, are far different from England's for very good reasons.

Kind of like the difference between being a 'subject' and a 'citizen'.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." According media reports, this quote keeping Obama company on his wheat-colored carpet is from King.


I like this quote. Too bad the Pres. attributed it to the incorrect party.

http://tinyurl.com/2aytb6r


Best,


Dave

 

[gprellwitz]

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." According media reports, this quote keeping Obama company on his wheat-colored carpet is from King.


I like this quote. Too bad the Pres. attributed it to the incorrect party.

http://tinyurl.com/2aytb6r


Best,


Dave

Well, I'm not sure I'd say that the President attributed it to the wrong party; rather he attributed it to an intermediary party. Here's a quote from 2006 where The Rev. Susan Manker-Seale attributed it to King from a speech back in 1961, with an acknowledgment to the aforementioned Parker. So it's quite correct to say that King said it, though more correct from an academician standpoint to attribute it to Parker.

One of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s, common quotes was given during a speech at the Fourth Continental Convention of the AFL-CIO in 1961: “I’m convinced,” he said, “that we shall overcome because the arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice.” When he said that, he was quoting our Unitarian forebear, Theodore Parker, whose mid-nineteenth century ministry was ostracized within our own Unitarian movement. Many Unitarians at the time, including the ministry, couldn’t agree with Parker’s views on a theology that transcended the Bible, and a ministry that advocated fervently against war and slavery. I would love to know the circumstances that led King to read Parker and to hone Parker’s words into a vision for our society, for it was Parker who first said, “I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one… And from what I see I am sure it bends toward justice.”

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Wow Grant; now we're going to attribute quotes to intermediary parties--interesting. Can't wait for folks to attribute that to me. The chain of intermediaries can get pretty long for older quotes, I'll bet!

Anyway, I like the quote.

Best,

Dave

 

[gprellwitz]

Wow Grant; now we're going to attribute quotes to intermediary parties--interesting. Can't wait for folks to attribute that to me. The chain of intermediaries can get pretty long for older quotes, I'll bet!

Anyway, I like the quote.

Best,

Dave

All I can say is that if you Google the phrase, King's name comes up much more than Parker's. And, according to WikiQuotes,

King's often repeated expression that "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice" was his own succinct summation of sentiments echoing those of Theodore Parker, who, in "Of Justice and the Conscience" (1853) asserted: "I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one, my eye reaches but little ways; I cannot calculate the curve and complete the figure by the experience of sight; I can divine it by conscience. And from what I see I am sure it bends towards justice."

And I acknowledge that this is not the most canonical of sources.

 

[AuntPeggy]

A friend sent this to us about a month ago. Just thought I'd share.


King ATP video..............................................................................................$35

King ATP test prep DVD.................................................................................$127

3rd attempt at FAA exam..............................................................................$65

Photo of Martha King exiting Skyhawk with her hands in the air.........................Priceless

http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2010/100831kings.html?WT.mc_id=100903epilot&WT.mc_sect=gan