2013年6月5日星期三

Jury Duty

I was stuck in court for almost the whole day because of jury duty. Jury duty is something no one should complain about. But, in my case, I do have a lot of grievances.

Last year, when I received a letter from the Sheriff Department (it is just like the Judiciary in HK responsible for jury matters) that I was on the jury roll, I immediately wrote back to ask for exemption but to no avail. In May this year, I received a letter asking me to attend court to serve as a juror, I immediately wrote back with a work transcript asking to be excused again. Once again, my request was declined. I arrived there this morning. About a hundred of us congregated in a room. A sheriff officer explained the basics and a DVD started to play the empanelling process. After that, it was not yet 10 am. We waited in the room killing time watching TV, reading books. I brought my tablet along to read some CFA cases I downloaded. I was just waiting for the first opportunity to see the trial judge and spell out my reasons to be excluded. I was pretty sure if the judge did not excuse me, the defence certainly would object to my sitting to decide the plight of the defendant. I waited and waited, wondering why it took so long for the empanelling process. It was 1 pm we were told to have lunch and return afterwards. At 3 pm, I was finally in the court room. I have not been to the court for 10 years. Everything looked so familiar and affable. The defence counsel was gawking at us from time to time. I knew what he wanted. He was to get a peripheral impression as who to exclude. I had eye contacts with him many times. I almost blinked at him to say, man, I would certain send the defendant to hell. It was a rape case.

Finally, it came the moment the judge asked if anyone wished to be excused. I was the first to raise my hand. I walked up to the witness stand with very proper court etiquette, I bowed before I said this, "Your Honour, I had been a xxx for 10 years in another jurisdiction and then another 10 spent as xxx. In all fairness to the defence, I should make him aware that I would normally see things from the prosecution's perspective. I have been a blogger writing legal comments attracting 800 readers a day." He smiled at me and said, "You are excused." The defence counsel said thank you to me too.

While I always feel I am as impartial as can be, but subconsciously, I cannot rule out the indoctrinated propensity to wear the shoes of a prosecutor.When the time has come to decide on credibility, I believe my threshold can be very high and am disinclined to cast a doubt on the prosecution case. If my attitude about the defendant is always that I am not easily fooled by his story, I don't think I can sit as a juror. In court, I just repeated what I told the Sheriff Department the reason for my exemption. They just turned a blind eye to the obvious and wasting the public money and my time.



9 則留言:

  1. 我倒認為 Sheriff Department 沒錯。你是否應該免役,要看(1)職業背景(2)是否真心相信自己有偏見,抑或托辭推諉公民責任(3)其他背景。如果沒規則訂明前檢控官可免役,Sheriff Department 便應將請求交由法官決定。如果法官否決(1),辯方又覺得(3)會令你同情被告,那他們有權冒險選你。又或者如果法官否決(1)後,認為你托辭推諉,可能會對你施如罰則,以儆效尤。
    總之是法官和控辯雙方的主觀判斷,Sheriff Department 不應插手。

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. Unlike how it works in HK, when a letter informing you that you are on the jury roll and when the summons is sent to you, there are number of items on the back of the letter you can tick to ask for exemption. In my case. In HK, I can certainly ask for exemption for the same reason and will be excused at the outset. I will write to the Sheriff Department to remove my name from the jury roll. If they refuse, next time I will end up in court with the same outcome. What is the point?

      Even if I put up pretext to ask for exemption, in law, I cannot be penalized. I would only be penalized if I fail to attend without reasonable excuse. If my reason for exemption is not acceptable to court, the court will simple decline my application.

      I genuinely believe I am not suitable to be a juror. I love to see the show. I love to see what mistakes they make though I cannot write about it.

      刪除
  2. A sharing on this subject matter.

    I was at the British Columbia Supreme Court one time to see the empanelling of jurors. For that particular section, a lot of jurors asked for excuse. And as long as the juror could give a reason (some reasons, in my person view, would be unlikely to be accepted in Hong Kong), the judge did excuse the juror (so all those who asked were excused). This is quite the contrary to what I observe in Hong Kong courts.

    It appeared to me the Canadians in British Columbia considered jury duty as a hassle.

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. It was the first time I was in the jury empanelling process. The judge was very easy going and acceded to request so easily here.

      刪除
  3. Bill

    You are not excluded or exempt from jury service because you are not currently holding the relevant office in the public sector. Please refer to the link attached.

    http://www.courts.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/cats/jury_service/exempt_excluded.html

    It appears that the judge has exercised his power to excuse you from jury service on 5/6/2013.

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. The list is never exhaustive. It is only something objective for people to apply for exemption to rely on. I am certain every time when I am summoned to court, I can be excused for the same reason. My reason is not fake. From the reading of my blog, my stance is crystal clear. You need a juror as a white sheet of paper who has no legal training is more desirable. Otherwise the jurors should all be lawyers. I explained in detail when I wrote back to the Sheriff Department. I know it is a waste of time for me because I would be excused or objected to by the defence at the end of the day. What I hoped yesterday was to get heard in the morning so that I could go as soon as possible. I do not want to enjoy any favourable treatment. I just try to be fair.

      刪除
  4. Dear Bill,

    I wonder about something which I think is partially related to this article of yours.

    I can understand why you think you, who may be regarded as pro-prosecution due to your past history as public prosecutor, are not suitable to serve as a juror. But if this argument hold true, how can we justify past DPPs like Zervos and McWalters, who must have even greater tendency to be "pro-prosecution", to go to bench?

    Many thanks.

    Regards,
    PLK

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. In the older days, a counsel appeared before a High Court Judge who was an ex DPP and said the same thing and he was almost kicked out of court. You can see Zervos and McWalters demonstrate the fairness by allowing appeals more than people who did not come from DOJ. In my case, I was only playing a very minor role in the prosecution back in the old days. But frankly, I would tip the balance towards the prosecution more. It was only on fairness I asked to be excused.

      刪除
    2. Many thanks for your response. I raised this issue just out of curiosity of the principle involved, without disrespect to Zervos and McWalters. I totally agree with you that they are very fair judges.

      刪除