TV, child care, and jurors

October 10, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Free child care. Free movies and wireless Internet. Time to shop during the day. These aren’t amenities law firms are giving employees to attract lawyers but are actually what some counties in the U.S. are doing to attract jurors.

No one likes receiving the jury summons in the mail. I received one earlier this year for Marion County, which required me to call a telephone number every evening to find out if my number had been selected. I got picked, showed up bright and early to the City-County Building and sat there for hours trying to pass the time with a book I brought. I saw a few magazines in the room, but beyond that, we prospective jurors were left to entertain and feed ourselves until we were called to serve on a jury or were dismissed.

Needless to say, it wasn’t an exciting morning.

Counties across the country recognize this, and some are providing free child care, free wireless Internet access, and TVs to play DVDs, according to a National Law Journal article. In fact, one county in Michigan gives its jurors a beeper so they are free to leave the building, shop, and eat, as long as they stay within a certain radius. If the beeper rings, you’ve been called back to serve.

But in this economy, where are counties and states getting the money to install televisions in juror waiting rooms, purchase beepers, and pay for day care for prospective jurors? I wonder if these courts have done a cost-benefit analysis and found the up-front investment for these items overall will save the courts money because trials will be less likely to be postponed and juror pools will be larger. I also have read some courts are considering cutting juror pay as a cost-saving method.

I’d like to see a way to bring in more jurors and increase the juror pool, and make the jurors not feel like being called to serve is a punishment or drag on the day. But will these types of amenities be enough to attract more jurors, or would cold, hard cash do the trick?
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT