Jury Duty: the selection process

Last week I had to report for jury duty. The standard response people give when you tell them that is one of sympathetic exasperation followed by suggestions for how to avoid actually serving. Granted, much of this is only in jest, but a large number of my fellow potential jurors went into the selection room bent on not serving. They answered yes or no to every possible question where yes or no might improve their chances of dismissal. The girl beside me actually showed defiance, and like those of her ilk with whom I had contact, seemed to think everyone around her shared her feelings. To be fair, this presumption occurred to varying degrees of earnestness, and many people only joked along these lines. But even then it seemed like they regarded this resistance to jury duty as a common denominator, a place where we could all come together for a tension breaker. Even if inside we really don't feel that hesitation, we're still expected to understand. I found that interesting. Why is that hesitation prevalent to the point of representing common ground? It's interesting to note that the Jury of 12 process has been around for 600 years. I wonder if this repugnance at serving has been around as long? But it's also interesting to note that trials by jury used to be attended by the public as a form of entertainment. It seems logical that at some point in its history serving on a jury must have carried some prestige. So what happened? Whatever happened, nowadays the hesitation to serve is like a default setting, a conditioned response, or something we do because everyone else does. I wonder how many people are even aware of it. I wonder how many people really feel that way. I wonder because from the moment I got the letter to appear I felt different. I wasn't eager and I wasn't unaware of the inconvenience, but I felt interested. I can't really explain why, but the whole idea felt like an opportunity and whenever someone expressed their sympathetic exasperation, I found it hard to respond. Strictly speaking I wasn't chosen. I was one of the few remaining candidates after the attorneys eliminated the rest. But I served on a jury in a criminal trial. Looking back I see what the selection process meant to me and I wonder if any of my fellow jurors would understand. It was an opportunity: an opportunity to separate myself from the heard, which seemed intent on gathering around the watering hole of hesitation to serve. It was a glimpse into what makes the heard the heard and a moment of clarity on my connection to it. I got to see one of the conditioned mob responses we all share. I feel that response, too, but I was able to recognize it for what it is: an autopilot reflex that I've learned. It's not how I really feel. Having a glimpse of that difference playing out inside myself is invaluable. Ever forward.

Posted via web from Ever Forward