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. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT