this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
74 points (96.2% liked)

chat

8104 readers
209 users here now

Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.

As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.

Thank you and happy chatting!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Just saved myself a few hours with that one.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

My dad got booted from a jury because he was a volunteer firefighter and it was an arson case.

Apparently they didn't want people prejudiced against arsonists.

I get the idea that a firefighter would be opossed to the idea of somebody who setting fires but by that same logic that should disqualify everybody who isnt a clinically diagnosed psycopath from ever serving on a jury for a murder case in the event they're going into the case with a negative perception of people who kill other people.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (2 children)

would be opossed to the idea of somebody who setting fires

Actually I'm thinking it's more likely that they got rid of him on the chance that he knows something about fires and the telltale signs of arson. Lawyers might not want a bigot but they definitely don't want an expert on the Jury.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

It’s this, however also, firefighters are statistically the most likely people to be arsonists, and the lawyer definitely doesn’t want an expert on the jury who is also potentially sympathetic to the defendant!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yes, generally speaking, the more intelligent you appear the riskier the trial becomes if you’re judging. If they want experts, they’ll pay someone they know will align with their side to show up. As for jurors, they want the average joe. Smart enough to put on his socks and drive to court, but also obedient enough to feel awe and respect for the institutions.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Apparently they didn't want people prejudiced against arsonists.

Ah, but have you considered the funnier possibility that they didn't want anyone who might look at an arsonist and think "this guy is good job security for me?"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If anything I'd be more concerned they'd be sympathetic because of the disproportionate percentage of firefighters that are arsonists.

Also I know you were joking but as a volunteer firefighter I promise my dad wasn't hoping for more opportunities to have to put out fires for free.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Absolutely definitely joking. Hope I never have to experience a house fire.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

well what if I do the good murder. looking pretty bias'd there, my guy, why do you hate the rule of law?