Stamp of Approval for Jury Service

Juries

Posted Sep 5, 2007, 08:15 am CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Robert J. Grey Jr. has never been on a jury, but it’s not for a lack of trying.

The former ABA president made strengthening juries one of his priorities during his tenure, and he takes jury duty seriously. Last year he filled out his jury questionnaire and walked it over to the courthouse, but was told he didn’t need to bother since lawyers are exempt from service in Virginia.

True, but that may change due to the work of Grey and two ABA groups he created. Among the jury principles approved by the ABA's House of Delegates in February 2005 is a recommendation that eligibility for jury service should not be denied based on occupation. “You aren’t getting a trial of your peers unless everyone gets a chance to serve,” he says.

One of Grey's groups, the ABA Commission on the American Jury Project, has had another recent success: It nudged the U.S. Postal Service to issue a stamp commemorating jury duty. It will be formally issued at a courthouse ceremony at Manhattan’s Foley Square on Sept. 12.

Grey will be there along with Chief Judge Judith Kaye of New York’s Court of Appeals, who was one of three co-chairs of the commission. Kaye was “the primary mover and shaker” behind the stamp, according to Grey.

Serving on a jury is “a chance to participate firsthand in democracy,” Grey says. He says it’s unfortunate that not everyone sees it that way. “We’ve created a culture where people view jury service as a burden as opposed to a high calling of citizenship,” he says.

The stamp is intended to emphasize the importance of jury service by depicting a diverse group of 12 representative jurors.

The stamp designer, Lance Hidy, has never been on a jury either. “I tried, but the judge didn't want me,” he says.

Hidy says he used staff and students as models from the college where he teaches. He designed the typeface, called Penumbra, which was also used for titles in the movie, The Da Vinci Code.

“Stamps, at their best, can remind a nation—and the rest of the world—what values its citizens hold most sacred,” he said in an e-mail. “And there is little in our vast, imperfect government that is considered more precious than the jury system. I am very proud to have played a small role in the creation of this stamp.”

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by Joe R - 10 months, 1 week, 4 days, 17 hours, 22 minutes ago

The stamp is nice enough, though I doubt many will be swayed, but I really can’t imagine anybody who would want or accept an attorney on a jury that was responsible for deciding their fate. While having attorneys available to serve on juries may sound “fair” and equitable to some, I think most defendants and defense counsel would agree the actual practice is a waste of time. Here in Ohio, attorneys are not exempt from jury duty and in my experience that means spending a day or even two waiting for the inevitable dismissal.
Posted by Martin - 10 months, 1 week, 4 days, 13 hours, 10 minutes ago

I agree with the first comment. I have been called for jury duty in California several times. Sometimes I have had to ask to be excused. No lawyer ever objected. Sometimes I was ready and willing to serve. I never made it past voir dire. I doubt I ever will.
Posted by Rolf Asphaug - 10 months, 1 week, 4 days, 12 hours, 49 minutes ago

I disagree: dismissal iISN’T inevitable. I was recently chosen to be on the jury for a criminal misdemeanor. I was so excited that I was finally going to experience a trial from the jury’s perspective! Unfortunately the judge declared a mistrial when the first witness, a police officer, improperly mentioned the defendant’s prior criminal record.
Posted by Peter C. - 10 months, 1 week, 4 days, 12 hours, 41 minutes ago

In Maryland—Montgomery County at least—not only are lawyers eligible for jury duty, so are judges.

I have been called to serve (our pool was not needed because the cases settled out), but when I asked about the effect of my profession, the Court officer said lawyers frequently serve on juries, that it was no basis for a challenge for cause, and told how the Chief Judge of the Superior Court had served on the jury in a multi-day criminal trial (this conversation was just a few years ago).

Apparently His Honor kept his identity and profession a secret from the other jurors, he was not even foreman. I’d bet it was a bit uncomfortable for the sitting judge and for counsel (who may have been afraid to try to strike him from the panel). I tell this story just to make the point that some jurisdictions view service as a part of everyone’s civic duty.

I personally see no reason why some knowledge of the law should disqualify a juror (though service as a prosecutor or criminal defense lawyer would justify a challenge for cause).

Commenting has expired on this post.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Juries