Jury issues in northern Indiana

February 21, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Two northern Indiana counties’ jury duty policies have made the news recently. In St. Joseph County, Superior Judge Michael Scopelitis is ordering more than 700 residents to come to court in March to tell him why they chose to ignore jury questionnaires mailed back in October. According to a South Bend Tribune article, about 18 percent of St. Joseph County residents who got these questionnaires ignored them.

The judge is tired of people thinking they can get away with not performing their civic duty, so now those 700 or so residents have court orders to come to court. The article also cites the time and money it costs to create and mail the questionnaires. Looks like those who tried to avoid spending time in a courtroom won’t be able to avoid it now.

And those who showed up for their civic duty in Lake Superior’s Civil Division will find themselves having to pay for their own lunches now. An article in The Times says budget cuts forced the Civil Division to do away with lunch payments for jurors. Chief Superior Judge John Pera said he is “frustrated” and “embarrassed” by the cut. He hopes to find a way to reinstate the lunch privileges for civil juries.

The general consensus among the public is dread when they receive a notice in the mail about possible jury duty. Like most things, ignoring the jury questionnaire and hoping it goes away doesn’t actually make the questionnaire or the legal responsibility to respond disappear. There are a few people out there who enjoy jury service, but for those who don’t, little incentives like free lunches help ease the pain. Taking those away may result in more counties finding themselves in the situation of Judge Scopelitis.

Should jurors receive free lunches or other benefits or should they just accept they are required to be jurors and do the deed with no kind of compensation?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • We Lawyers Must Act to Preserve Our Courts
    We lawyers should not ignore a story like this. Unfortunately, these two unrelated stories are being repeated in other parts of the country. They are indicative of the growing lack of respect that the public has for our judiciary. The failure or refusal to return jury questionnaires is disrespectful of the courts, and it demonstrates that the public also realizes that they can ignore the courts and in many instances the courts lack the money and the personnel to chase down people who ignore jury summonses. The cutting of budgets for core court activities, like taking care of jurors, is also indicative of the lack of respect that the public and the other branches of government have for the needs of the courts. In Lake County it is lunches for jurors. In other counties and states judges don't have adequate technology or research assistance. In some places the courts are running out of money to even be open five days a week. This is just the beginning of the erosion of our court system. Every one of us involved in the legal profession needs to be vigilant of these signs of erosion of our courts. When these events occur, local and state bar associations need to step forward to assist the courts in maintaining their budgets and they need to speak to the public so that the public will understand that the courts deserve their respect and adequate funding.
  • Professional Juries might be the answer
    As you note, there are people who enjoy being jurors. Why not allow people to be "professional jurors"? Some of us get paid for jury duty. Why not allow us to volunteer to serve, and let people pick a convenient time (month/week) to serve? These simple reforms might improve the ability to get people to attend, and reduce the number of exemptions for those who who (but do not want to be there).
  • Citizen's Rights
    If this is TRULY a govt. "of the people,by the people,and for the people,then the "people" should be the ones to decide whether or not they want to serve on jury duty.The politicians are the ones who deem it a "privilege" and and "duty" for citizens to be inconvenienced for something they may not otherwise choose to do. But of course, the politicians also say it is the duty of the poor and middle class to be "patriotic" and die in wars, yet this same "patriotic" duty is not extended to the rich and the politicians kids. Who runs this country anyway??? The politicians,or the people???
  • dying republic
    Citizenship in America is little better than residency anymore, and the average American has become a hard pressed slave of global capitalism. Exactly how does the average person have time for jury duty. I appreciate the legal process but if the "people" want a jury system then they should be able to compensate jurors according at least to minimum wage and pass employment incentives on to employers of some kind as well. Otherwise people will keep on skipping because they have to do so as a matter of economic survival.

    PS Judge Scopelitis runs a tight ship I hear and I applaud his frank action to expose this problem.

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. The ADA acts as a tax upon all for the benefit of a few. And, most importantly, the many have no individual say in whether they pay the tax. Those with handicaps suffered in military service should get a pass, but those who are handicapped by accident or birth do NOT deserve that pass. The drivel about "equal access" is spurious because the handicapped HAVE equal access, they just can't effectively use it. That is their problem, not society's. The burden to remediate should be that of those who seek the benefit of some social, constructional, or dimensional change, NOT society generally. Everybody wants to socialize the costs and concentrate the benefits of government intrusion so that they benefit and largely avoid the costs. This simply maintains the constant push to the slop trough, and explains, in part, why the nation is 20 trillion dollars in the hole.

  2. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  3. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  4. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  5. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

ADVERTISEMENT