Latest / Stuff Mom Never Told You / SMNTY Deliberates on Women and Jury Duty

Transcript

SMNTY Deliberates on Women and Jury Duty · Stuff Mom Never Told You

0:05
Speaker 1: Hey, this is Danny and Samantha and welcome to stuff
0:07
Speaker 1: I'll Never told you production of iHeartRadio. And if you're
0:19
Speaker 1: listening to this when it comes out. I have been
0:22
Speaker 1: absence or about a week because I got jury duty.
0:28
Speaker 1: I was selected. I served on a jury If we
0:32
Speaker 1: have time, I'm going to talk about it at the end.
0:34
Speaker 1: If we don't have time, I'll talk about it in
0:36
Speaker 1: a Monday Mini because I learned a lot everyone. It
0:41
Speaker 1: was a really intense, fascinating experience. I've been summoned to
0:48
Speaker 1: jury duty before, but this was the first time I've
0:50
Speaker 1: been chosen to serve on jury duty. And it happened
0:55
Speaker 1: very suddenly because I had pushed it off. You get
0:59
Speaker 1: one defer e that is not related to They have
1:03
Speaker 1: kind of a set of reasons that you can just deffer.
1:08
Speaker 1: Then you have one you can just say, like, this
1:10
Speaker 1: is not a good time for me. And I did
1:12
Speaker 1: it because I got somemoned doing when we were going
1:14
Speaker 1: to be in Seattle, so I deferred it and then
1:18
Speaker 1: it came up again.
1:19
Speaker 2: That was so quick turnaround too. It was a quick turnaround.
1:23
Speaker 1: It was a quick turnaround, and I was like, oh,
1:25
Speaker 1: this is actually not a good time for me either,
1:27
Speaker 1: which I'm sure is what everyone says, but they were like, nope,
1:31
Speaker 1: used tell your center, earl, you're coming back. And this
1:36
Speaker 1: episode is kind of timely in a couple of ways.
1:39
Speaker 1: Although as I was researching this, it's not as timely
1:43
Speaker 1: as I thought, because there were a couple cases that
1:46
Speaker 1: happened around women serving on jerry duty on like Halloween,
1:51
Speaker 1: but it was like very specific, So it's not as
1:54
Speaker 1: timely as I got really excited about when I was
1:57
Speaker 1: research But yeah, we have been I feel like I
2:05
Speaker 1: have been traveling, busy doing stuff since June, and then
2:13
Speaker 1: you were sick, Samantha, and then this jury duty thing happened,
2:19
Speaker 1: and so if I'm a little arresty, that is why.
2:24
Speaker 1: But yeah, one of the things that I will say
2:26
Speaker 1: is interesting about this is I have never made it past. Essentially,
2:34
Speaker 1: what happens is you get a you get a letter
2:38
Speaker 1: and it says you've been summoned, and it gives you
2:41
Speaker 1: the date and time and all of that. I went
2:44
Speaker 1: in last time I was summoned, the case got settled
2:50
Speaker 1: before even a jury had been chosen, so I thought
2:54
Speaker 1: that I had served jury duty and it just got settled.
2:57
Speaker 1: But that is not what happened this time. I made
3:01
Speaker 1: it to the interview stage obviously, perhaps, but you know
3:07
Speaker 1: that's when they ask you their questions if they're trying
3:10
Speaker 1: to see do we want this person on our jury.
3:13
Speaker 1: And they asked me about the podcasting, Samantha, and they
3:18
Speaker 1: were like, well, what what are your podcasts about? And
3:22
Speaker 1: I have to say I said it was an intersexual
3:26
Speaker 1: feminist podcast. I did not do the thing we usually
3:28
Speaker 1: do or I usually do or it's women's yes, because
3:33
Speaker 1: I was like, no one they could look it up.
3:35
Speaker 1: But two, I'm won't be clear. I'm clear about this.
3:41
Speaker 1: But they did ask me a lot of questions about
3:43
Speaker 1: my closeness or proximity to true crime podcast which makes sense.
3:49
Speaker 2: Did you tell them we had like at least episodes
3:51
Speaker 2: about it and why women love them?
3:54
Speaker 1: I did not bring that up.
3:55
Speaker 2: If they just talked about the episode, you should just
3:57
Speaker 2: talked about the episode all the time.
4:00
Speaker 1: I said, I was truthful. If anyone is listening that
4:07
Speaker 1: I have provided voices for true crime podcasts before, usually
4:11
Speaker 1: as a favor to a friend of ours that we
4:14
Speaker 1: work with, but I've never been involved in scripting them
4:19
Speaker 1: or writing them, creating them anything like that, But anyway,
4:22
Speaker 1: I ended up getting chosen. And I do want to
4:25
Speaker 1: say for this episode, which we're going to be talking
4:27
Speaker 1: about the history of women and jury duties in the
4:30
Speaker 1: United States, we are focusing on those things women in
4:35
Speaker 1: the United States because there are and have been a
4:39
Speaker 1: lot of questions around should we even have juries, because
4:43
Speaker 1: we can't remove the toxic racist, sexist, homophobic, abilists soup
4:48
Speaker 1: that we're all raised in. But then again, other people argue,
4:52
Speaker 1: like is it better to trust judges alone? Some argue
4:55
Speaker 1: that we don't need to do away with juries, we
4:57
Speaker 1: just need to do a better job of making sure
4:59
Speaker 1: they are representative. I will say I think mine was
5:02
Speaker 1: pretty representative. Again, if I have time, I will talk
5:06
Speaker 1: about it at the end. And I also like, you
5:12
Speaker 1: have to take notes during it, and they don't. There's
5:17
Speaker 1: no transcripts, so you take these notes. And it even
5:23
Speaker 1: came up and closing arguments where one of the attorneys
5:27
Speaker 1: they were both women, by the way, one of them
5:29
Speaker 1: is famous, but they were both they were both women,
5:33
Speaker 1: and it came up at the end one of them
5:36
Speaker 1: said something that was incorrect and I had written down
5:40
Speaker 1: the actual true statement, but the judge said, I hope
5:44
Speaker 1: they wrote it down, because they don't. They don't provide
5:47
Speaker 1: that for you. And essentially they give you the laws
5:52
Speaker 1: to read, and you read them and try to apply
5:56
Speaker 1: them to the evidence that you have, so I can
5:59
Speaker 1: see that. Even to me, I was like, I'm really
6:02
Speaker 1: tired and this lot doesn't make sense to be and
6:05
Speaker 1: you're asking like somebody's life is in my hands at
6:07
Speaker 1: this current juncture, and I'm so tired. So I see
6:11
Speaker 1: the arguments all around it. Also, just to throw this
6:15
Speaker 1: out here, there are juror scams that are happening right now.
6:20
Speaker 1: Here's a quote from the Fulton County website. Do not
6:24
Speaker 1: pay money, our chancefer money to cards are wires over
6:27
Speaker 1: the phone for missed jerry duty to anyone claiming to
6:30
Speaker 1: be a sheriff's deputy, which I happened to hear somebody
6:37
Speaker 1: going through. She was crying. She was at the court
6:40
Speaker 1: and she was crying. She's like, I am here and
6:43
Speaker 1: I had I went through this person and all of
6:45
Speaker 1: this because you can and will get in trouble for
6:48
Speaker 1: not showing up. Yes, yes, so she was. It sounded
6:53
Speaker 1: like she had fallen victim to one of these scams. So,
6:56
Speaker 1: oh no, be aware that that is a thing. Yes,
7:02
Speaker 1: but okay, let us just briefly go over the definition
7:05
Speaker 1: of jury duty from Miriam Webster. Quote. Service on a
7:10
Speaker 1: jury a group of people who make a decision in
7:12
Speaker 1: a legal case. So the lawyers present these faircases their evidence.
7:19
Speaker 1: Usually the burden is on the state to prove it,
7:23
Speaker 1: and then the judge instructs you on the law, the jurors.
7:30
Speaker 1: He instructs the jurors on the law you have to
7:33
Speaker 1: apply to the evidence, and then you go deliberate and
7:36
Speaker 1: you talk about it, and you decide. From the official
7:41
Speaker 1: Federal website. Quote, Jurors listen to testimony, review evidence, and
7:45
Speaker 1: render decisions in civil and criminal trials. Most US citizens
7:49
Speaker 1: who are eighteen or older may serve on a federal jury. Quote.
7:55
Speaker 1: Being summoned for jury service does not mean that a
7:57
Speaker 1: person will end up serving on a jury. Jury is
8:00
Speaker 1: needed for a trial. A group of qualified jurors who
8:03
Speaker 1: reported to court in response to the jury summons is
8:06
Speaker 1: taken to the courtroom where the trial will take place.
8:09
Speaker 1: The judge and attorneys ask the potential jurors questions general
8:13
Speaker 1: are related to the specific case before them, to determine
8:16
Speaker 1: their suitability to serve on the jury. The process is
8:19
Speaker 1: called warder, which typically results in some perspective jurors being
8:23
Speaker 1: excused based on their answers from serving in that trial.
8:27
Speaker 1: The attorneys also makes good to certain number of jurors
8:30
Speaker 1: without giving a reason. Also, it varies by state, so
8:37
Speaker 1: to be eligible in Georgia, for example, you have to
8:40
Speaker 1: be a US citizen, be at least eighteen years old,
8:43
Speaker 1: be proficient in English enough to understand and discuss the case,
8:46
Speaker 1: be a resident of the county that sent you the
8:48
Speaker 1: jury summons. Have not served on a jury for the
8:51
Speaker 1: last twelve months, so hey, I got a year. God
8:55
Speaker 1: not currently be on a grand jury or another trial jury,
8:59
Speaker 1: not be under conservatorship, have had your civil rights sort
9:03
Speaker 1: if you were convicted of a felony, are mouthfeasance while
9:06
Speaker 1: holding public office? And that I'm assuming. I know assuming
9:11
Speaker 1: is dangerous, but I'm assuming that's pretty much what most
9:14
Speaker 1: states are. The jurys can look different. So the one
9:18
Speaker 1: I was on was fourteeners with two alternates, but there
9:23
Speaker 1: are also other makeups like six with one alternate or
9:26
Speaker 1: two alternate, And boy were we looking up those alternates
9:30
Speaker 1: because essentially the alternates you don't know you're an alternate,
9:35
Speaker 1: and you listen to the whole case, and then at
9:37
Speaker 1: the end you're told you're an alternate. You don't deliberate,
9:41
Speaker 1: but you're supposed to. They don't want you to.
9:43
Speaker 2: Don't know if you're an alternate. That is now, so
9:46
Speaker 2: you don't know all time whether or not you're an alternate.
9:48
Speaker 1: Where you know and I know, Oh, I was crossing
9:52
Speaker 1: my fingers because I'm a coward and it was a
9:54
Speaker 1: burger case if. But essentially they want they don't I
10:00
Speaker 1: want anyone to know they're an alternate, so you pay
10:02
Speaker 1: the same attention. That's fair. But then they announce it
10:05
Speaker 1: right before the jury goes to deliberate who the alternates
10:08
Speaker 1: are and there to come in if something happens. However,
10:13
Speaker 1: our alternates wanted to deliberate. Oh, and they ask the
10:18
Speaker 1: judge if we could swap out, because there were plenty
10:21
Speaker 1: of people that were like, I'm good, you want to
10:23
Speaker 1: take my spot, it's fine, And he said he'd never
10:26
Speaker 1: been asked that question before. But the answer was no.
10:31
Speaker 2: People want me me, let me do this.
10:33
Speaker 1: Yeah, they were invested. They were both very invested, but
10:38
Speaker 1: I don't know. Maybe they'll never know, So that's kind
10:51
Speaker 1: of the basic outline of what it looks like today.
10:56
Speaker 1: But if we look back historically, it's gone through a
11:00
Speaker 1: lot of changes. I saw a lot of conflicting information
11:07
Speaker 1: about the start of jury duty, which again we're kind
11:11
Speaker 1: of focusing on the West and the US. But the
11:16
Speaker 1: story goes that the right to trial by jury started
11:18
Speaker 1: in England in twelve fifteen CEL, though there were similar
11:23
Speaker 1: practices happening earlier than that. Many of them excluded women,
11:28
Speaker 1: know and a lot of it had to do with
11:29
Speaker 1: things around owning property, which most women couldn't, having the
11:34
Speaker 1: right to vote, which most women couldn't. These requirements that
11:40
Speaker 1: just women couldn't meet because of the law, so that
11:43
Speaker 1: meant that they couldn't serve on juries. There were some
11:46
Speaker 1: exceptions though, going as far back as several hundred years.
11:50
Speaker 1: In England all women juries juries of matrons were tasked
11:55
Speaker 1: with figuring out whether or not women facing the death penalty,
11:58
Speaker 1: usually because if they were, they were exempt from the
12:04
Speaker 1: death penalty and got a lesser sentence. This was called
12:08
Speaker 1: pleading the belly.
12:09
Speaker 2: That's very specific.
12:10
Speaker 1: It is right enter the all women juries. They were
12:15
Speaker 1: considered medical experts. They were consulted about inheritance claims, they
12:20
Speaker 1: examined women for signs of witchcraft, and they provided testimony,
12:26
Speaker 1: And in seventeen ninety eight, the first instance of an
12:29
Speaker 1: English style jury system in Australia consisted of a women
12:34
Speaker 1: only jury. So they inherited a lot of that from England.
12:38
Speaker 1: But yeah, with the burgeoning of male medical professionals and
12:43
Speaker 1: things like the stethoscope, these matrons and women only juries
12:48
Speaker 1: dated away. Legal scholar Alicia Simmons wrote in twenty twenty
12:52
Speaker 1: one that by the eighteen hundreds, people were starting to
12:55
Speaker 1: suspect women jurors were quote too irrational, too burdened by
13:00
Speaker 1: suckling incense, too sexually ignorant, or too easily corrupted by
13:05
Speaker 1: sexual knowledge. So yeah, I know, right, I feeling that's
13:10
Speaker 1: all the things.
13:11
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're just too human.
13:15
Speaker 1: We don't try.
13:16
Speaker 2: I think, I don't think I like this. You know
13:19
Speaker 2: too much, You've say too much, right, you've birth children, No,
13:25
Speaker 2: thank you, we don't like that.
13:27
Speaker 1: Stay home with the kids. We'll decide these cases, which
13:30
Speaker 1: is essentially what happened, and we'll break that down. But
13:34
Speaker 1: it wasn't until nineteen ninety seven that women secured the
13:39
Speaker 1: same jury rights as men. Across all of Australia. So historically,
13:44
Speaker 1: in the US, women have been shut out of jerry duty,
13:48
Speaker 1: allegedly because this aspect of public life was too intense
13:52
Speaker 1: for women's delicate sensibilities, plus women just not having the
13:57
Speaker 1: same rights as men in general.
14:00
Speaker 2: He was still so from the ACLU. The ACLU has
14:04
Speaker 2: worked over the years to remove barriers to women serving
14:07
Speaker 2: on juries. Under English common law, which was the basis
14:10
Speaker 2: for early American law, women except in a small category
14:13
Speaker 2: of cases, were deemed unfit to serve on juries under
14:17
Speaker 2: the doctrine of propter defectum sexes a defect of sex.
14:21
Speaker 2: I call myself a defective sex all the time.
14:25
Speaker 1: I guess that's a positive. I don't know.
14:28
Speaker 2: It's a thing. Oh it's a thing according to them anyway.
14:33
Speaker 1: Yes, And this was used. This legal argument was used
14:38
Speaker 1: for a long time, the defect of sex. In eighteen
14:42
Speaker 1: seventy nine, the Supreme Court in the United States determined
14:45
Speaker 1: that race based disqualifications from jury duty were illegal, but
14:49
Speaker 1: affirmed that states could keep their jury choices to men
14:52
Speaker 1: and exclude women. However, a few states made laws allowing
14:57
Speaker 1: for women to serve. Utah was the first d to
15:00
Speaker 1: rule that women were capable and eligible for jury duty
15:03
Speaker 1: in eighteen ninety eight. Also, plenty of states blatantly did
15:08
Speaker 1: exclude black people. To be clear, a lot of this
15:11
Speaker 1: came from the warder jury selection process, which basically allowed
15:15
Speaker 1: people to make decisions based on stereotypes. So even if
15:19
Speaker 1: it's like illegal to do that, people still did it. Yes. Also,
15:26
Speaker 1: women were sometimes called illegally anyway. So I read a
15:30
Speaker 1: couple fun I all say fun stories about women in
15:34
Speaker 1: smaller towns where they just didn't have a lot of people,
15:36
Speaker 1: and were like, yeah, it doesn't matter if it's illegal,
15:40
Speaker 1: we'll call in the women. And in some places, women
15:43
Speaker 1: could hold positions in the judicial system, but not serve
15:47
Speaker 1: as jurors. Jumping ahead to the early nineteen hundreds in
15:51
Speaker 1: the US, women were popular in some states as jurors
15:56
Speaker 1: for prohibition violation cases. Places like New York had legislations
16:01
Speaker 1: allowing for female jers that kept getting stalled and dismissed
16:05
Speaker 1: with claims that the state wasn't ready for something quote
16:09
Speaker 1: so experimental ooh. The UK passed the Sex Disqualification Removal
16:16
Speaker 1: Act in nineteen nineteen, but women were excused from shocking
16:21
Speaker 1: cases in nineteen twenty one, the Louisiana Constitution was updated
16:27
Speaker 1: with quote, no woman shall be drawn for jury service
16:31
Speaker 1: unless she shall have previously filed with the Clerk of
16:35
Speaker 1: the District Court a written declaration of her desire to
16:38
Speaker 1: be subject to such service. So essentially, a woman had
16:42
Speaker 1: to do an extra step to serve on jury dute.
16:45
Speaker 1: She had to know about it and have the initiative
16:48
Speaker 1: go do this thing, which of course means that there
16:51
Speaker 1: were less women serving. And there's a lot of legal
16:56
Speaker 1: fights that were going to get into around this idea,
17:00
Speaker 1: because essentially the argument was that doesn't meet the requirements
17:06
Speaker 1: of a jury, that it should be something that gives
17:11
Speaker 1: a point of view of like everybody. Women jurors were
17:15
Speaker 1: allowed to serve in some districts, though, as you know,
17:19
Speaker 1: this whole time is when women in the US were
17:22
Speaker 1: getting the right to vote. Many suffragettes believed they'd get
17:26
Speaker 1: the right to serve on juries like with the right
17:29
Speaker 1: to vote, but that didn't happen. By in nineteen twenty seven,
17:33
Speaker 1: only nineteen states had passed laws sanctioning women's presences on juris.
17:40
Speaker 2: Yeah, in a nineteen twenty seven edition of the Women's
17:42
Speaker 2: Lawyer's Journal, Bernita Shelton Matthews wrote, since the adoption of
17:46
Speaker 2: women's suffrage, women have arrived, so to speak, and are
17:49
Speaker 2: demanding the why and wherefore of their exclusion from jury service.
17:53
Speaker 2: Evidently they were not satisfied with the reasoning of the
17:56
Speaker 2: great English jurist Sir William Blackstone held that the common
18:01
Speaker 2: law requires jurors to be free and trustworthy human beings,
18:05
Speaker 2: and that while the term human beings means man and women,
18:09
Speaker 2: the female is, however, excluded on account of the defect
18:13
Speaker 2: of sex. If it be, as Blackstone says, a defect
18:18
Speaker 2: of sex that bars women from the jury box, the
18:21
Speaker 2: women claim that the defect lies in the masculine, not
18:25
Speaker 2: the feminine ranks. Are women to be jurors or not
18:28
Speaker 2: to be? That is a question now confronting many state legislators.
18:32
Speaker 2: If there's one subject which all the women's organizations are
18:35
Speaker 2: agreed upon, it is probably jury service by women. So
18:40
Speaker 2: with the women's cities clubs, the women's bar associations, the
18:44
Speaker 2: Women's Party, and many other feminine regiments camping on their trail,
18:48
Speaker 2: the lawmakers may as well prepare for a battle royale.
18:52
Speaker 2: So one picture which is often conjured up is of
18:54
Speaker 2: a mother being dragged off to jury duty while someone
18:59
Speaker 2: sings to the grind. Nice little baby, don't get in
19:02
Speaker 2: a fury. Mama maybe must sit on the jury.
19:05
Speaker 1: Yeah, so this was a really I recommend reading this
19:09
Speaker 1: article because this woman was coming for them.
19:13
Speaker 2: She was mad, I just like she wanted. That's how
19:17
Speaker 2: I read that. Everything was in sarcasm, dripping with sarcastle.
19:22
Speaker 1: Oh she was mad, but this was this quote, the
19:29
Speaker 1: like kind of little rime was something that was essentially mom's.
19:35
Speaker 1: Women should stay home with their children, and that's why
19:40
Speaker 1: they shouldn't serve on a jury. A Michigan Circuit judge wrote,
19:46
Speaker 1: as quoted in this article, the women have brought to
19:48
Speaker 1: the juries an element of sincerity, honesty, and righteousness which
19:53
Speaker 1: was not present in the same extent before. I would
19:56
Speaker 1: no more think of going back to the exclusive men
19:58
Speaker 1: jury system of the past, then I would of advising
20:01
Speaker 1: that home out to be managed and run without the
20:04
Speaker 1: influence of women. The change has been greatly beneficial, and
20:08
Speaker 1: what is more remarkable is that it has worked no
20:11
Speaker 1: inconvenience nor harm. The article also includes quotes from judges
20:16
Speaker 1: citing the eagerness of women to serve compared to men.
20:19
Speaker 1: They were like, women want to do it, men don't
20:21
Speaker 1: want to do it. But to be clear, the author
20:25
Speaker 1: goes on to make the point that black men could
20:28
Speaker 1: serve but white women couldn't, which we see over and
20:32
Speaker 1: over again. But that was one of the reasons she
20:34
Speaker 1: was real mad. A California case in nineteen forty six
20:39
Speaker 1: led to a Supreme Court ruling that federal juries and
20:42
Speaker 1: states that allowed women to serve on jury duty must
20:45
Speaker 1: include them in the jury pool to represent a quote
20:49
Speaker 1: cross section of the community, but it did not apply
20:53
Speaker 1: to states where women were not permitted to serve. At
20:57
Speaker 1: least a few cases were appealed because there were no
21:00
Speaker 1: women on the jury.
21:03
Speaker 2: So a justice wrote about this whole situation. The legislature
21:06
Speaker 2: still has the power to prescribe the qualifications of jurors
21:09
Speaker 2: and to impose this burden upon men alone, if it
21:12
Speaker 2: sees fit so to do. It is not contended that
21:15
Speaker 2: juries composers of men would be less fair to women
21:17
Speaker 2: defendants than what juries composed of women. Indeed, experience would
21:22
Speaker 2: lead to a contrary conclusion. The spirit of chivalry and
21:26
Speaker 2: of deep respect for the rights of the opposite sex
21:28
Speaker 2: have not yet departed from the heads and hearts of
21:30
Speaker 2: the men of this country, all men or two nice anyway.
21:37
Speaker 1: Women got the right to serve on federal juries with
21:40
Speaker 1: the nineteen fifty seven Civil Rights Acts. All fifty states
21:45
Speaker 1: didn't passed similar legislation until nineteen seventy three, though also
21:50
Speaker 1: in nineteen fifty seven is the same year the film
21:53
Speaker 1: Twelve Angry Men came out all about men on the jury.
21:56
Speaker 1: That is named that for a reason. It was really
22:01
Speaker 1: in the nineteen sixties that this issue gained a lot
22:04
Speaker 1: of traction and attention. At the time, a lot of
22:08
Speaker 1: the arguments were that women needed to stay home, that
22:11
Speaker 1: they had too much going on managing the family and
22:14
Speaker 1: cooking and caring for their kids, and they didn't need
22:17
Speaker 1: the extra pressure or burden of jury duty. Up until
22:21
Speaker 1: the nineteen sixties, women in Alabama, South Carolina, and Mississippi
22:24
Speaker 1: couldn't serve on jurys. Other states had ginger based barriers
22:29
Speaker 1: to service, like requiring women to register with the clerk
22:32
Speaker 1: of court if they wanted to serve. Like we said,
22:35
Speaker 1: in nineteen sixty one, the Supreme Court heard and sustained
22:39
Speaker 1: the conviction of a woman in Florida tried by an
22:42
Speaker 1: all male jury. If I'm remembering correctly, it was second
22:45
Speaker 1: degree murder. At the time, Florida had stipulations around women
22:49
Speaker 1: serving on jury's. The court found that it did not
22:53
Speaker 1: violate the fourteenth Amendment and that there was not enough
22:56
Speaker 1: evidence to prove discrimination, so the appeal was dismissed.
23:00
Speaker 2: So here's a part of what they wrote about their decision.
23:03
Speaker 2: Despite the enlightened emancipation of women from the restrictions and
23:07
Speaker 2: protections of bygone years, and their entry into many parts
23:10
Speaker 2: of community life formerly considered to be reserved to men,
23:14
Speaker 2: women is still regarded as the center of home and
23:17
Speaker 2: family life. We cannot say that it is constitutionally impermissible
23:21
Speaker 2: for a state, acting in pursuit of the general welfare,
23:25
Speaker 2: to conclude that a woman should be relieved from the
23:27
Speaker 2: civic duty of jury service, unless she herself determines that
23:32
Speaker 2: such service is consistent with her own special.
23:34
Speaker 1: Responsibilities, special responsibility.
23:40
Speaker 2: The special responsibilities.
23:44
Speaker 1: In nineteen sixty eight, Judge George Dittrich said, of six
23:48
Speaker 1: women serving on the Antelope County jury in Nebraska, quote,
23:52
Speaker 1: this is a special occasion, since this is the first
23:54
Speaker 1: time in the history of Antelope County that a jury
23:58
Speaker 1: has been impaneled consisting about men and women. This is
24:01
Speaker 1: further evidence of the progress of the day and age
24:04
Speaker 1: in which we live. This despite the fact that women
24:09
Speaker 1: obtain the right to serve Jerry duty in Antelope County
24:12
Speaker 1: in nineteen forty three. So again, just because legally women
24:16
Speaker 1: or marginalized people could serve, there were obstacles and methods
24:21
Speaker 1: of keeping them out. But I think that happened on Halloween.
24:24
Speaker 1: I think that was the one. I got really excited, like,
24:26
Speaker 1: oh yeah, timing life, it's a horror story.
24:31
Speaker 2: Yes. Wow.
24:43
Speaker 1: There were other reasons that were often given for keeping
24:47
Speaker 1: women out. I'm sure they won't be a surprise, so
24:50
Speaker 1: let's go through a few of them. They were too
24:53
Speaker 1: delicate for the details of the cases, especially sex offenses,
24:57
Speaker 1: which would quote shock the moral sensibility. Here's another quote.
25:03
Speaker 1: Juries deal with all manner of crimes, from innocuous offenses
25:07
Speaker 1: to the vilest and most revolting aberrations of the human beast.
25:11
Speaker 1: Their educations, their habits of mind, their points of view
25:15
Speaker 1: have not prepared women to deal with such cases.
25:19
Speaker 2: But oftentimes the victims were women. Okay, okay, okay, sure, sure, sure.
25:25
Speaker 2: From a nineteen sixty six Mississippi case, courts have quote
25:29
Speaker 2: a right to exclude women to protect them. In some areas,
25:33
Speaker 2: they are still upon a pedestal from the filth of
25:35
Speaker 2: scenity and noxious atmosphere that so often pervades a courtroom
25:40
Speaker 2: during a jury trial.
25:42
Speaker 1: Once again, another reason popularly given is that they would
25:47
Speaker 1: be too sympathetic, that they wouldn't be able to convict.
25:51
Speaker 1: Multiple judges and lawyers wrote about this at the time
25:54
Speaker 1: and what they called false sympathy. One attorney argued that
25:58
Speaker 1: women were too soft. Yeah, here's a quote of Philadelphia
26:04
Speaker 1: judge writes that he had one woman on a murdered
26:07
Speaker 1: jury last winter that brought in a verdict of first
26:11
Speaker 1: degree in the case of another woman. She had deliberately
26:15
Speaker 1: shot her sweetheart, and the woman juror served notice on
26:19
Speaker 1: her eleven male companions that the time for such practices
26:23
Speaker 1: had passed. Well, dang it, lots of one back there
26:32
Speaker 1: from in eighteen seventy Wisconsin case. Women know quote nothing
26:36
Speaker 1: of the dangers besetting men sometimes and the conditions under
26:39
Speaker 1: which men are sometimes compelled to slay in defense of
26:42
Speaker 1: their own lives. Reading about this, though, I have to say,
26:48
Speaker 1: I don't really know what to make of it either way.
26:51
Speaker 1: But I don't think this bared out because a lot
26:54
Speaker 1: of the examples that were used women did convict and
26:58
Speaker 1: I don't know if they felt like they had to
27:00
Speaker 1: right or I don't know what it was, but this
27:03
Speaker 1: was not panning out. Also another reason, given that they
27:08
Speaker 1: would support lawlessness if it helped their community, it wouldn't
27:13
Speaker 1: be a good idea for them to be in close
27:16
Speaker 1: contact with male jurors, especially for a long time. Interestingly,
27:24
Speaker 1: men were assumed to be softer on women defendants, which
27:28
Speaker 1: I'm like, okay, so you're that's okay.
27:31
Speaker 2: Right, Ill mean, that's what what the earlier quotes were like, Yeah,
27:35
Speaker 2: they're too nice men, just they still too too gentlemanly
27:40
Speaker 2: to convict a woman.
27:42
Speaker 1: What what Yeah, it doesn't match up or isn't it right?
27:49
Speaker 1: And again this matters for a lot of reasons, but
27:53
Speaker 1: one of the big ones is there are a lot
27:54
Speaker 1: of cases of all white jerries vindicating Ku Klux Klan violence,
28:00
Speaker 1: so like it's important who get selected for these juries.
28:09
Speaker 1: A lot of lawsuits followed in the ensuing years against exemptions.
28:14
Speaker 1: For example, one the ACLU filed against an exemption for
28:19
Speaker 1: any quote housewife with children under fourteen years old, and
28:24
Speaker 1: I think that was in Georgia. Exemptions for women were
28:28
Speaker 1: viewed as violating both women's rights and the rights of
28:31
Speaker 1: the defendant to a fair cross section of the county
28:35
Speaker 1: guaranteed in the sixth Amendment. And there was some sexism
28:40
Speaker 1: involved in getting women the right to do jury duty too,
28:45
Speaker 1: because Yeah, a lot of their arguments involved how women
28:48
Speaker 1: were more empathetic, better at sensing the truth, more domestics.
28:53
Speaker 1: So it's like they were using those arguments to get
28:56
Speaker 1: women on the journey as well.
28:58
Speaker 2: Right, I mean when you look at the way that
29:02
Speaker 2: the defending attorney versus the car like the prosecutor, the
29:07
Speaker 2: way they what they are looking for, it's very much
29:09
Speaker 2: those two types of arguments, like very split of like,
29:12
Speaker 2: oh they're not they're gonna be too liberal, or they're
29:14
Speaker 2: gonna be they're gonna be sympathetics, let's do these things
29:16
Speaker 2: type of a thing. In that conversation, which also is
29:18
Speaker 2: why was chef that you were picked?
29:20
Speaker 1: I'm still like, which one picks me?
29:23
Speaker 2: I don't, right, I doubt it was the prosecution, to
29:25
Speaker 2: be honest.
29:26
Speaker 1: Anyway, moving on, they were they were the ones that
29:28
Speaker 1: were asking me the question the crime.
29:31
Speaker 2: Yeah, you do know. That could be a conversation that
29:34
Speaker 2: we looked to do because like true crime people are
29:36
Speaker 2: they more likely to have bething sympathetic or like more
29:40
Speaker 2: likely to convict because they're scared.
29:43
Speaker 1: She asked me like, are you able, which they asked
29:49
Speaker 1: something like this in every every juror, but she asked
29:52
Speaker 1: me something that was different slightly, where she was like,
29:55
Speaker 1: can you look at evidence? And you're more you're looking
29:58
Speaker 1: at the evidence and not for the store. Yeah, so
30:01
Speaker 1: I don't know, I don't know, but the state She
30:06
Speaker 1: was like, no question, she already had you on a list.
30:10
Speaker 1: Whichever it may have been feeling.
30:12
Speaker 2: L No, I'm just those are my own thought process anyway. However,
30:19
Speaker 2: it wasn't until nineteen seventy five, in the case Taylor
30:22
Speaker 2: versus Louisiana, that the Supreme Court ruled that excluding women
30:25
Speaker 2: from jury duty was illegal because it didn't fulfill the
30:29
Speaker 2: requirements of choosing from a fair accurate representation of the
30:34
Speaker 2: population guaranteed in constitutional amendments. However, this did not stop
30:40
Speaker 2: lawyers from preemptively using strikes against women to keep them
30:43
Speaker 2: off juries.
30:45
Speaker 1: Obviously, yes, right until nineteen ninety four, when the Supreme
30:51
Speaker 1: Court once again made a ruling, this time that these
30:54
Speaker 1: gender based strikes violated equal protections provided by the Fourteenth Amendment,
31:00
Speaker 1: but still courts were caught doing it anyway, even though
31:05
Speaker 1: a nineteen eighty six case found that prosecutors could not
31:09
Speaker 1: use race in preemptive strikes against a potential juror. In
31:14
Speaker 1: the early nineteen nineties, Alabama courts were exposed for striking
31:17
Speaker 1: black women specifically from jury selection, and some of the
31:22
Speaker 1: official reasoning was literally quote because she's a woman. And
31:27
Speaker 1: of course, again, the race has been and continues to
31:31
Speaker 1: be a huge issue when it comes to jury selection,
31:33
Speaker 1: but also systemic racism in our justice systems and society.
31:39
Speaker 1: Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg spoke about the importance
31:44
Speaker 1: of having women serving on jury duty in one of
31:48
Speaker 1: her last appearances as a lawyer for the ACLU. She
31:52
Speaker 1: argued that it marked women and their contributions as lesser
31:56
Speaker 1: and that without women, they were quote diluting the quality
31:59
Speaker 1: of community judgment a criminal jury trial provides.
32:03
Speaker 2: From the Michigan Journal of Gender and Law, They say
32:06
Speaker 2: divergent life experiences may also create reliable gender differences. In
32:10
Speaker 2: response to criminal jury trials, in the United States, women
32:14
Speaker 2: experience higher rates of sexual assault, which may influence their
32:18
Speaker 2: perceptions of the evidence in sexual assault cases and their
32:21
Speaker 2: predisposition to empathize with victims of such assaults. Likewise, the
32:25
Speaker 2: experiences of pregnancy and childbirth, as well as the expectation
32:29
Speaker 2: that women take primary responsibility for childcare, may lead women
32:32
Speaker 2: to consider that children are in their domain of control
32:35
Speaker 2: and to uphold values of concern and care for children.
32:39
Speaker 1: Yes, and as I'm looking at the time, as we
32:41
Speaker 1: record this, I think I'll talk about my experience on
32:44
Speaker 1: a Monday, Mini, But I will tell you that whole
32:49
Speaker 1: idea of like prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The reasonable
32:53
Speaker 1: doubt that does depend on your experience, and there were
32:58
Speaker 1: some different people had different viewpoints on the reasonable doubt,
33:04
Speaker 1: So I think this is really important. The quote goes on.
33:08
Speaker 1: The evidence bears this out. In sexual assault cases, the
33:11
Speaker 1: gender of jurors has routinely been associated with case relevant judgments.
33:16
Speaker 1: It is linked to the likelihood of jurors blaming sexual
33:19
Speaker 1: assault victims and believing damaging rapness, which in turn influence
33:23
Speaker 1: final verdicts and proposed sentences. Women are significantly less likely
33:28
Speaker 1: than men to believe rapness. Rapnists may include statements or
33:33
Speaker 1: beliefs such as, she asked for it, it was not
33:35
Speaker 1: really rape, he did not mean to, she wanted it
33:39
Speaker 1: the rape, she lied about the rape, and the rape
33:42
Speaker 1: is a trivial event. In the context of rape perpetrated
33:45
Speaker 1: against a woman by a man, these myths can serve
33:48
Speaker 1: to undermine the gravity of the sexual assault, minimize the
33:51
Speaker 1: male rapist personal responsibility, and discredit and blame the female victim. Relatedly,
33:58
Speaker 1: women serving as mo jurors have been found to empathize
34:02
Speaker 1: more with sexual assault victims than men do, providing higher
34:05
Speaker 1: ratings for victims credibility, believability, and truthfulness. Experimental research shows
34:11
Speaker 1: that women jurers are more strongly and frequently able to
34:14
Speaker 1: take the perspective of believe and empathize with a sexual
34:18
Speaker 1: assault victim than their male counterparts, and some studies have
34:24
Speaker 1: indicated that having women on the jury in sexual assault
34:27
Speaker 1: cases leads to increased conviction. And I think we see
34:34
Speaker 1: this in famous cases today. I'm sure plenty of examples
34:40
Speaker 1: that you can come up with off the top of
34:43
Speaker 1: your head where you have been like, oh no, I
34:46
Speaker 1: just I didn't believe her, and I have to say,
34:50
Speaker 1: I was outside of another courtroom. I don't know what
34:53
Speaker 1: the case was about, but they were all saying she
34:58
Speaker 1: was too dismissive and she like she. I didn't believe
35:01
Speaker 1: that she. I didn't believe her. I don't trust her,
35:05
Speaker 1: like all of these things that we hear over and over.
35:08
Speaker 1: If you're listening to this and you're thinking, well, yes,
35:11
Speaker 1: it is a huge inconvenience for people who are full
35:14
Speaker 1: time caregivers for children to do jury duty, yes it is, yeah,
35:20
Speaker 1: But the distinction was that it was women specifically that
35:25
Speaker 1: were designated as doing the child care caregiving. Now, the
35:31
Speaker 1: general consensus is that women has been traded for person
35:36
Speaker 1: who is the primary caregiver to a child six years
35:39
Speaker 1: or younger, which people around me when they were being
35:43
Speaker 1: interviewed did use to say, I can't do jerry duty quote.
35:50
Speaker 1: In criminal cases, research confirms that a jurors gender is
35:53
Speaker 1: associated with different views of defendant culpability and victim blameworthiness
35:58
Speaker 1: in sexual assault and child sexual abuse trials, resulting in
36:02
Speaker 1: distinct judgments in those cases. This distinction also emerges in
36:07
Speaker 1: capital cases. Women as a group are significantly less likely
36:11
Speaker 1: than men as a group to support the death penalty,
36:13
Speaker 1: which I have to say, before this started, I was
36:17
Speaker 1: told the death penalty is not on the table.
36:22
Speaker 2: But they did they do a plea deal. Well, they
36:25
Speaker 2: could have do a plea deal like that interesting just
36:28
Speaker 2: the level of.
36:29
Speaker 1: Crime, because I think they had a question on there
36:32
Speaker 1: that was they had a bunch of things that were like,
36:34
Speaker 1: I'm just opposed to this, like in general, and one
36:38
Speaker 1: of them was like, are you opposed to the death penalty?
36:40
Speaker 1: So I think they're saying like, it's not you can't
36:44
Speaker 1: get out of it that way.
36:47
Speaker 2: Or or did they tell them people who were like
36:48
Speaker 2: I love the death penalty, like, calm down, this is
36:51
Speaker 2: not an option. Don't get too excited.
36:53
Speaker 1: I think it's There were a bunch of things where
36:55
Speaker 1: I was like, I think there are two signs of
36:56
Speaker 1: his coins and one of them in here. It was
36:59
Speaker 1: a there was a lot of questions about people and
37:03
Speaker 1: their thoughts about guns, but they picked a lot of
37:07
Speaker 1: people who were very pro gun. I'm sure, yes, yes,
37:12
Speaker 1: I will talk about it. I'll wait for my mundane,
37:15
Speaker 1: but I will talk about it. I will say, like
37:27
Speaker 1: when I was looking at you know, present day issues
37:32
Speaker 1: other than are just justice system. But one thing I
37:37
Speaker 1: found when it came to present day issues with women.
37:42
Speaker 1: I mean every article was like, what should you wear
37:46
Speaker 1: as a woman to Jerry duty? Really what is appropriate
37:50
Speaker 1: to wear? And I was like, wow, there are dudes
37:53
Speaker 1: in shorts and hats.
37:55
Speaker 2: I've seen many men in their like literal house farm
38:00
Speaker 2: outfits and a hat and they're working boots, which is fine,
38:03
Speaker 2: there's nothing wrong with that. But I'm like, why are
38:05
Speaker 2: you telling women to dress up? Yes, men don't like
38:08
Speaker 2: feel the need to do that either. A lot of
38:11
Speaker 2: them wear caps, and I don't think that's allowed. Like
38:13
Speaker 2: I legitimately, in a court room they tell you cannot
38:16
Speaker 2: have hats.
38:16
Speaker 1: Yes, I will say they took an off for the
38:19
Speaker 1: court room, but there were many hats. I had to
38:22
Speaker 1: get out my old clothes. I had to find some clothes. Man,
38:25
Speaker 1: I had to put on some real clothes. I had
38:29
Speaker 1: to look presentable. It's the whole thing. But also I
38:34
Speaker 1: just get fancy.
38:35
Speaker 2: So when I worked in court for our trials, I
38:37
Speaker 2: can't have to be all decked out like we would
38:40
Speaker 2: get all that. And that was for a little while.
38:42
Speaker 2: We were totally couldn't wear pants and we had to
38:45
Speaker 2: wear any hose. Yeah, like that was recently all the
38:49
Speaker 2: last ten years because I worked a lot into juvenile court.
38:52
Speaker 2: This is a juvenile car court, not even supreme court,
38:55
Speaker 2: not even like the level of felony courts. It's weird
39:00
Speaker 2: of what they expected like that was not necessarily court
39:02
Speaker 2: because court people, because there was different types of workers.
39:04
Speaker 2: Court workers sometimes just gave no craps that were like, nah,
39:09
Speaker 2: I'm in here every day, you can't make me work?
39:12
Speaker 1: Yeah, fair enough, Well I would love Well, we'll talk
39:16
Speaker 1: about this and our upcoming.
39:20
Speaker 2: I love that word teasing this.
39:22
Speaker 1: Yeah, please listen to it because I got a lot
39:24
Speaker 1: to say. But one of the things that there were
39:29
Speaker 1: I was nervous for a lot of reasons. But I
39:32
Speaker 1: was really really nervous because there were I want to say,
39:37
Speaker 1: four or five dudes that were just like I just
39:43
Speaker 1: felt like they were gonna yell at me if I
39:45
Speaker 1: disagreed with them. But I was very I was so concerned.
39:49
Speaker 1: I was like, this is a responsibility, and I have
39:51
Speaker 1: all these worries and all of this. It worked out fine, good,
39:55
Speaker 1: but but there were a couple of comments that I
39:57
Speaker 1: was like, we would not get along. But one of them,
40:01
Speaker 1: I think he was trying to make white of the mood,
40:04
Speaker 1: because again it was a murder trial. He said, one
40:09
Speaker 1: of the I learned so much. They brought in like
40:13
Speaker 1: a forensic expert and a cell phone data expert and
40:17
Speaker 1: all this stuff, but they bought in a medical examiner.
40:21
Speaker 1: And he was like, she was so hot, she was smoking,
40:25
Speaker 1: and I was like, oh my god, she was talking
40:28
Speaker 1: about like a dead body man.
40:31
Speaker 2: And all he was thinking was yeah, girl, I hit that.
40:36
Speaker 1: It's like, wow, okay.
40:41
Speaker 2: I need to know people how people reacted though to that,
40:45
Speaker 2: Like then people were like.
40:45
Speaker 1: Yeah, it was it was an awkward like let's move
40:49
Speaker 1: on quickly.
40:51
Speaker 2: I hope you learned a lesson. I hope you learned
40:53
Speaker 2: a lesson, dude.
40:54
Speaker 1: Well then he was trying to be like she had
40:57
Speaker 1: a rash, she was nervous, and people were like, she
40:59
Speaker 1: probably would.
41:02
Speaker 2: Like it is one of even with like a case
41:06
Speaker 2: with barely anybody in the courtroom to testify, is unnerving
41:11
Speaker 2: and even if you are especially because you never know.
41:14
Speaker 2: Some course allow you to have documentations so you can
41:17
Speaker 2: read it off. Some will not, some will take it
41:20
Speaker 2: from you and use it as evidence, Like you have
41:23
Speaker 2: so many stipulations that you don't understand, and different courtrooms
41:26
Speaker 2: do different things. Like I remember having to go into
41:28
Speaker 2: different courtrooms because I would work for the entire state
41:31
Speaker 2: and I have to go testify or something, and I'd
41:33
Speaker 2: be like, hey, what does what do they do? They're like, yeah,
41:35
Speaker 2: you can't. You can have notes, but that's it. Don't
41:38
Speaker 2: take anything that can be submitted to court because they
41:39
Speaker 2: will take it. And I was like, oh, okay, let
41:42
Speaker 2: me know because like they and it's to memorize and
41:45
Speaker 2: to know you have to do this and that there
41:48
Speaker 2: is a chance that if you get it wrong, they're
41:50
Speaker 2: gonna say you're persuring and we'll get arrested.
41:55
Speaker 1: I would be terrified. I would have been terrified. And
41:58
Speaker 1: it was like there were so many things that I
42:02
Speaker 1: think people see on TV and they were trying to
42:05
Speaker 1: use it. It's like, see she's something's off and I'm like, no,
42:08
Speaker 1: she's nervous. They're just nervous. She's just nervous.
42:12
Speaker 2: Okay, Unludy, you were there to be the voice of reasons, like,
42:16
Speaker 2: this is not a drama.
42:18
Speaker 1: They're not actors.
42:19
Speaker 2: This is what happens, what would behoove her why? But
42:26
Speaker 2: but the thing about this is is that whoever the
42:31
Speaker 2: witnesses for the person who's coming to do like the
42:33
Speaker 2: cross examination. They will use that and say that I
42:36
Speaker 2: think this is why because it does work. I have
42:39
Speaker 2: had that where they come at me once again and
42:42
Speaker 2: they'd be like, you said this earlier, and it was
42:44
Speaker 2: ten o'clock at one point, now it's at ten thirty.
42:46
Speaker 2: What is it? Are you lying to us? And I'm like,
42:48
Speaker 2: oh my god, I said around, I don't know. And
42:52
Speaker 2: then they will ask you that same question repeatedly, like
42:54
Speaker 2: this is true that this has happened, where they will
42:56
Speaker 2: ask you the same question repeatedly, thinking that they can
43:00
Speaker 2: trip you up. Yeah, and then that can get a
43:03
Speaker 2: little bit of doubt and that's enough.
43:05
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, Oh my gosh, I can't wait to talk
43:08
Speaker 1: about this.
43:08
Speaker 2: I can't wait about it either. I want you to
43:10
Speaker 2: talk about this.
43:11
Speaker 1: This had been this case had been tried before, and
43:14
Speaker 1: the previous jury was a hung jury. Oh and it
43:16
Speaker 1: was the complete opposite of what we did, which shows
43:20
Speaker 1: you like what the lawyers took and they were like
43:23
Speaker 1: adaptor yum. But one of the things is like the
43:28
Speaker 1: things they say at the top, their opening statements and
43:31
Speaker 1: closing arguments are not true. They don't have to be
43:33
Speaker 1: true but people take it as must be true. They're
43:37
Speaker 1: saying it with authority. Yeah, nope.
43:40
Speaker 2: If they do it with a love, enough drama and
43:43
Speaker 2: enough conviction and they don't have to say that, they
43:46
Speaker 2: will be like, but imagine if you did this and
43:50
Speaker 2: this was you, would you like they do? They like that,
43:52
Speaker 2: they mess with you real hard.
43:54
Speaker 1: Yeah, but that's when, like I said earlier, the judge
43:57
Speaker 1: was like, it's up to the jury. I hope you
43:58
Speaker 1: took notes up, I ohn, No, I did take a
44:02
Speaker 1: lot of notes.
44:03
Speaker 2: Sorry, I got him. Are you the foreman? No?
44:07
Speaker 1: The foreman actually was really cool. I didn't think i'd
44:11
Speaker 1: like him. I've yeah, I'll talk about it. But he
44:13
Speaker 1: looks like our friend Ramsey. He looked exactly like, oh,
44:16
Speaker 1: throw the game off. Every time I saw him, I
44:19
Speaker 1: was like, and he said he gets that all the time,
44:21
Speaker 1: that he looks like somebody.
44:23
Speaker 2: Somebody that's funny.
44:25
Speaker 1: Yes, anyway, okay there. It was another thing I saw
44:30
Speaker 1: when I was researching, like current women on jury duty issues,
44:35
Speaker 1: what title does she answer to? What title does she use?
44:38
Speaker 1: Which I think is just like, let's retire that whole
44:41
Speaker 1: thing conversation. Here's a quote. Anne Eisenberg studied thirty five
44:48
Speaker 1: South Carolina death penalty trials and found that the defense
44:51
Speaker 1: used forty of its strikes on women and fifty nine
44:55
Speaker 1: of its strikes on men, whereas the prosecution used fifty
44:59
Speaker 1: nine of its women and forty one of it strikes
45:03
Speaker 1: on men, a statistically significant difference. A follow up study
45:07
Speaker 1: with more detailed information about the race and gender of
45:11
Speaker 1: the prospective jures likewise confirmed these gendered patterns and prosecutors
45:16
Speaker 1: and defense attorneys preemptory challenges. So yeah, that is still ongoing.
45:22
Speaker 1: I will say I also saw things. I won't say
45:27
Speaker 1: I'm ashamed, but I will admit I felt it. That
45:30
Speaker 1: was about like how to stand up against angry men
45:33
Speaker 1: if you disagree with them in this setting, and it
45:37
Speaker 1: got heated. This got heated, really. Yes, we deliberated for
45:44
Speaker 1: seven hours and there were raised voices.
45:48
Speaker 2: They were able to give evidence and witness within like
45:50
Speaker 2: three days. Yeah, that's quick. That's a lot quicker than
45:53
Speaker 2: I thought they would have.
45:54
Speaker 1: It kind of had one main piece of evidence and
45:56
Speaker 1: then no no real witnesses other than they brought in
46:01
Speaker 1: the state had to bring in the experts to enter
46:03
Speaker 1: into evidence. That this happened in Fulton County oh okay,
46:08
Speaker 1: but I'll go all into it. Please check out my
46:13
Speaker 1: upcoming Monday mini. But yeah, pretty much. They did the
46:17
Speaker 1: evidence fairly quickly. It was like two days. It was
46:24
Speaker 1: two and a half. It was one and a half days,
46:26
Speaker 1: and then we deliberated for one and a half day,
46:29
Speaker 1: maybe more than that, but it got heated. It was well.
46:34
Speaker 1: I was really glad though, because it was mostly women
46:38
Speaker 1: that were really like, I strongly believe this, and it
46:43
Speaker 1: was women from all different backgrounds, and so I was
46:48
Speaker 1: really glad to have that because honestly, I thought I
46:50
Speaker 1: was gonna have to be the only one that's like,
46:53
Speaker 1: because people joke about Jerry duty, you know, they don't
46:55
Speaker 1: want to have it. They just want to get done.
46:57
Speaker 1: It's a big inconvenience, which it is. Yeah, get paid
47:00
Speaker 1: twenty five dollars a day, right, But I was worried
47:03
Speaker 1: that I was gonna be the only one that's like, no,
47:06
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna I'm not willing to just say right
47:09
Speaker 1: whatever to get out to give a verdict.
47:12
Speaker 2: I want. It's not gonna go with the majority just
47:14
Speaker 2: to get this up away.
47:15
Speaker 1: Yes, what you were not allowed to do, but I'm
47:17
Speaker 1: certain people do it. And in fact, we got roll
47:20
Speaker 1: called at the end where you have to say, hey, no,
47:23
Speaker 1: I did.
47:23
Speaker 2: But they did a polling.
47:24
Speaker 1: Yeah, they did a polling where the prosecution asked like,
47:29
Speaker 1: did you come to this conclusion? Do you agree with
47:31
Speaker 1: this conclusion? Like, there's no doubt we all had to
47:36
Speaker 1: do it. So I'm really glad there were people that
47:39
Speaker 1: were very like, no, let's talk this out, and honestly
47:43
Speaker 1: everybody was, but I'm glad that they were, Like they
47:45
Speaker 1: were like two or three there were like three or
47:48
Speaker 1: four women I will say that were really and we
47:51
Speaker 1: had them on opposite sides. It was good. Yeah, yeah, yeah,
47:56
Speaker 1: But okay, So there are obviously still a lot of
48:00
Speaker 1: issues with Jerry Duty. One of the big things I
48:04
Speaker 1: ran into are courts grappling with non binary, trans and
48:08
Speaker 1: gender non conforming folks. How does that look? And then obviously,
48:13
Speaker 1: as we've been saying throughout, racism just in the system.
48:19
Speaker 1: But I do think this experience for me was really enlightening,
48:25
Speaker 1: and I personally had a really good experience with my
48:30
Speaker 1: fellow jurors where we did that's good. We did talk
48:33
Speaker 1: it out, even though it was really traumatic, but we
48:38
Speaker 1: did talk it out, and I do uh well, I
48:43
Speaker 1: feel like it was a really harsh punishment and I'm
48:46
Speaker 1: not sure how I feel about that, but I'll talk
48:48
Speaker 1: about that my Monday minie. So yeah, I mean, I
48:50
Speaker 1: guess next time, you know, if you get jerry duty
48:53
Speaker 1: or you get summoned, think about this another the fight
48:56
Speaker 1: people have had to get on jury's. It doesn't mean
49:01
Speaker 1: there are not issues, because there are. And I believe
49:04
Speaker 1: our other podcast stuff you should know and stuff you
49:07
Speaker 1: missed in his new class. I've done episodes about some
49:11
Speaker 1: of those issues. So I'm not saying those don't exist,
49:15
Speaker 1: because they do. But people did fight for this right,
49:19
Speaker 1: and it is important to have a diverse jury because
49:22
Speaker 1: I'm telling you one guy he was like, well dudes,
49:26
Speaker 1: just do that, and all the women were like, that's
49:28
Speaker 1: not a defense.
49:31
Speaker 2: He actually said that out loud.
49:32
Speaker 1: He said it out loud. So it is important to
49:36
Speaker 1: have those different all those perspectives, and especially for more
49:41
Speaker 1: marginalized compunities to have those perspectives. But anyway, look forward
49:47
Speaker 1: to our Monday minywhere Smith and I will talk about
49:50
Speaker 1: our experiences. But in the meantime, if you have ever
49:55
Speaker 1: served on jury judy, or if you have any experiences
49:59
Speaker 1: working in this kind of setting. Please let us know.
50:02
Speaker 1: You can email us stuff and you mom Stuff at
50:04
Speaker 1: iHeartMedia dot com. You can find us on Twitter at
50:06
Speaker 1: mom Stuff podcast, or on Instagram and TikTok at stuff
50:09
Speaker 1: I've Never Told us You. We have a tea pup
50:11
Speaker 1: a store, and we have a book you can get
50:12
Speaker 1: wherever you get in your books. Thanks as always to
50:15
Speaker 1: our super producer Christina or executive producer and our contributed
50:18
Speaker 1: to Joey. Thank you and thanks to you for listening.
50:20
Speaker 1: Stuff I Never Told You is production of iHeart Radio.
50:21
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, you can check out the
50:23
Speaker 1: heart Radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you listen to
50:25
Speaker 1: your favorite ships.