that anyone who defends himself has a fool for a client....
I HAD always wanted to serve on a Jury.
Yesterday I got that opportunity when I was chosen as a juror in Federal District Court in a case in which the plaintif claimed breach of contract and racial discrimination (she is white).
The plantif was representing herself. Interesting, I thought.
NOT
It was almost painful watching the plaintif get picked apart by the Defendents Council. The Judge, in light of the plaintif's inexperience, was very liberal and generous in trying to guide the plaintif through the processes and terminology.
Yesterday, three hours after arriving, the 30 potential jurists were whittled down to 12. During the process, I announced that with a previous employer, I had been named in a discrimination suit based on National Origin. (the EEOC repeatedly refused to take that case and obviously I deny ever descriminating on that basis, but that is another story for another day which involves the plaintif claiming to be the grandson of a Prime Minister of India--??!!)
In any case, there was nearly 6 hours of testimony yesterday by the plaintif and her witnesses.
We go back today to witness the cross examination by the Defense. We then go to lunch. Immediately upon returning from lunch we were told by the judge that the Defense had requested, and was granted, Summary Judgement.
The Judge determined that there was no evidence to support the claims of the Plaintif. Case dismissed.
Questions for the Barristers among us:
How does a law suit get that far if there is no basis for the case? Is it simply an issue of the Plaintif getting her day(s) in court? Wouldn't the Court have reviewed all of the potential exhibits and the deposition before a jury was seated? Did the Plaintif simply not ask for the right exhibits to be entered into evidence? Why would she have prepared many, many exhibits and then not ask that they ALL be entered as evidence?
Who pays the cost of the two days of proceedings? Taxpayers? Plaintif?
Why, generally, does one choose not to seek representation? Is it usually a matter of $$$$? Ego?? Delusions??
In light of my stating that I had been accused of discrimination based on National Origin, do you think I was chosen as a juror in this case by the Plaintif or the Defense?

I guess the moral of the story is that as much abuse as Lawyers receive, they are sometimes (IMO)essential
Best Regards,
Murph (who had done his civic duty)

BTW, I have gotten the desire to serve on a jury out of my system and hope to never be called on to do it again.