One person who was removed from jury duty over his views on concealed handguns
David Friedman has a substantial post on his website regarding his recent experience with jury duty. In part, he wrote this:
I informed the judge that I had been at least peripherally involved in the academic controversy over whether people should be allowed to carry concealed firearms. When the judge asked if I would judge the case according to the law rather than according to my own moral beliefs, I replied (truthfully) that I would not. I was dismissed from that case, sent back to be reassigned and, since they apparently didn't need jurors for any other cases at that point, sent home. . . .
Labels: ConcealedCarry, Judiciary
posted by John Lott at 11:39 AM
3 Comments:
Nothing wrong with removing persons for their views on issues or events. During voire dire I was once asked if the fact that the defendant had twice before been convicted of rape of a minor would give rise to a bias against the defendant.
The answer? Yes. I was summarily excused.
Mr. Friedman was very clearly not removed from a jury because of any personal views he had. He was removed because of his answer to the question about whether he would decide a case based on the law.
Dear 2nd Anonymous:
This is kind of a fine line that you are drawing. He felt strongly enough about the issue that he couldn't ignore his views and decide the issue solely on the base of the law.
Post a Comment
<< Home