Read the handwritten letter on the attached link. Words elude me.

http://www.thesmokinggun....jury1.html

When did Rob Shipley move to Bozeman?

Funny!!! But the judge should have thrown him in jail for contempt. I would have.

His wife admited to writing it. She sould have to do the time.

I agree that she could have worded her statement a little less crudely. But she deserves bonus points for creativity. I think she painted an interesting picture. The courts are not near lenient enough when it comes to hardship cases. It could cost me more than a little money everyday to serve on jury duty. Am I supposed to just eat that money because I am a good citizen? A 2 week trial would put me out of business. Is the court gonna write me a check every week until I build a new career? They actually laugh in your face when you bring that up. In my job, I have to work very hard to not judge people. It's not something I can just turn on when jury duty calls. I don't feel it's my place on this earth to judge others, and will never participate again.
The last time I served on a jury, and it will be the last time ever, we were in court all day, and sent to the jury room about 8:00 pm. Well after midnight, I called the bailiff in, and told him I was done, and was headed home to get some sleep. He informed me that leaving the building would result in charges against me, and I was sure welcome to get some sleep in jail, if I decided to leave before we had a verdict. I was told we were not leaving the building until we had a verdict. When I informed my fellow jurors of this, the case was decided 10 minutes later. Do you think this defendant got his just due? He may have, but we will never know. But I was not spending another minute being held against my will. And I got a check in the mail for $18. That amounted to about $1.00 per hour for my time. The system is broken, rather badly in my opinion. I'm not sure if professional jurors are the answer, but something needs to be done.
The last time I was called for jury duty, I loudly declared that I hate everybody. And then ran thru the list of usual suspects. Loudly. Jews, Christians, Mexicans, Blacks, Indians, Old People, Kids, etc. I think the only ethnic group I missed was white women between 25 and 30 years old. I was politely asked to leave. I hate being forced to sound like a bigot, but it worked once, and I will use it again if I ever have too.
For a little perspective, I am also an officer of the court. But the system is broken, and I refuse to play the game until there is some real effort to fix it. Civic duty my butt. Civic duty is whatever I decide to do for my city. Not what I am forced to do.

[This message has been edited by Matt Schmitz (5/4/2009)]

I wonder if you would feel the same way Matt, if you were the one that was on trial, and needed a jury. Or worse yet, if you were injured by a criminal (or even in a car wreck) and needed a jury to arrive at the conviction.

Would you say the same thing if you were drafted to serve in the military by your government? "Civic duty is whatever I decide to do" is about what you said, right?

Serving on jury duty is one of the responsibilities of citizenship. Everyone is always carping about their "Rights" as citizens, but never their responsibilities. Without citizens owning up to their responisibilities - be it jury duty, testifying as a witness, serving in the military (as a volunteer or as a draftee) - we would cease to maintain our rights.

I find your willingness to lie (as you claim - maybe you are a bigot - you said you were one while making statements under oath) to dodge your civic duty disgusting. You should be charged with perjury.

[This message has been edited by JCF (5/4/2009)]

Mr. Schmitz, you do not deserve to be a citizen of this country. I am appalled and disgusted by your attitude that you are more important than anybody else. You claim to be 'an officer of the court' but behave like a common criminal. I wish I knew where you were employed so I could report you for perjury.

"But the system is broken, and I refuse to play the game until there is some real effort to fix it. Civic duty my butt. Civic duty is whatever I decide to do for my city. Not what I am forced to do."


Who is supposed to fix the system?


"Every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty"- John D.Rockefeller Jr

Hell Yeah! Let's get rid of juries! And Criminals! Just pick'em up an throw away the key! They done it! I knowed they did! Them there Red Chineeese is doin' one thing right! 'Guilty til proved innocent!' I always say!

I found the three times that I was on jury duty to be one of the best times in my life. Learning how the process works, listening to both sides - it was quite a bit of fun as well as being informative.

One of my times I got called for jury service was on December 26th. Yes the day after Christmas. I got a good laugh out of it when I saw the notice because the cases go Mon-Wed and Wed-Fri and since Christmas was on a Monday (2006 I think) and because you're excused from further service if you don't get called by the 2nd day I didn't think we'd get called.

Sure enough when I went to the King County Court House in Seattle about 15 minutes after I sat down they called off the court cases for that week. Sucks but I got to spend a good day downtown post-Christmas shopping.

Just to echo the thoughts here I too am dismayed pissed off at your attitude towards jury service Matt. I hope you would reconsider in the future.

[This message has been edited by Kyle L. Varnell (5/4/2009)]

Matt,

Pretending? to be racist isn't what got you off. I guarantee everyone in the room knew exactly what you were doing. They just let you off because they didn't want a huge jackass on the jury.

BTW, if you are a government employee, I guarantee you were getting payed for your time serving jury duty. As others have said, if you are ever a victim of a crime, you will need the help of your fellow citizens to receive justice. Hopefully for your sake they won't be as obnoxious as you.

I was a juror on a 6 week capital murder trial in California a couple years ago. It was one of the most draining experiences of my life, but I don't regret doing it at all. It really improved my view of the legal process.

Don't judge Matt too harshly. He clearly stated that a 2 week trial would put him out of business, and that in his experience, the court didn't care about this. Surely, this should be taken into consideration as well?

I just received my 4th summons for jury duty in King County Superior Court in 4 years. 4 times in 4 years. I'm beginning to think too many people are skipping out on their jury duty or King County is arresting too many people.

BTW, it pays $10/day but it costs at least $20/day to park in downtown Seattle and lunch downtown will probably be another $10.

I'm thrilled.

Hehe, I lived in Alameda County in CA which contains Oakland. There were always plenty of trials. We pretty much figured on getting called once a year.

As an attorney it is not likely that I'll ever be on a jury but I'd love to. I disagree with Mr. Schmitz's tactics although I do understand the fear of being put out of business. I don't think that Matt had to go to the extreme he did. If he'd simply said that his fear that his business would be permanently damaged would adversely affect his ability to concentrate or render an objective verdict, he'd have been excused. Neither the court nor the parties to the case are interested in jurors who can't perform their duties.

So Mr. Schmitz, did you get the reaction that you hoped for? I'm skeptical that an "officer of the court" would behave so boorishly in a courtroom. Your "witty" tirade was unprofessional and, if your story is true, you certainly should be embarrassed to tell it.

On second thought, I don't know why I was surprised by your actions. After all, you're the same guy who went to church so you could nail some 'tang.

I don't know, Matt. I kind of like the Sixth and Seventh Amendments. I guess occasional jury duty is a small price to pay for having those rights.

First of all poison, you need to learn to read. I went to church to be near the woman, not "nail some tang" as you so descriptively put it. Get a freaking clue.
Secondly, I am not employed by anybody but myself. Thats why a 2 week jury trial would put me out of business. I work alone, and if I don't do the work it doesn't get done, and my clients go looking for my replacement. I have spent 11 years building my business, and I am not willing to take the chance that some judge could end what I have worked so hard to build, by preventing me from doing my job, however noble the cause. I have bills to pay, as I suspect you all do too. Most, if not all of you would likely do whatever it takes to keep your business viable, so you can pay those bills.
Thirdly, I am in no way a bigot. Some of you know me, and can vouch for that. I don't expect anyone to stick their neck out defending me. I know who you are. Thats good enough for me. I said what I said to get out the door and get back to work. Do you people do your job to the best of your ability? Me too. But I can't do that sitting in a court room.
And lastly, where is all this talk of perjury coming from? I have never lied under oath, and never would. I made my statements before any official proceedings were underway. Long before anybody was under oath. Loud enough for an attorney to hear. Incidently, I still do lots of work for that attorney that asked for me to be excused from that jury. He knows I am always available for work. Not stuck on a jury trial for 2 weeks.
Ok, one more. Just like the woman that wrote to the judge here in Bozeman, I had to stick my neck out to support myself. She was doing whatever she had to do to insure that her husband was working to support his family.
Lastly, I presented a possible solution to the problem, that being professional jurors. Haven't heard a peep about solutions from you that are so quick to judge me. Bitch and moan about what someone else says or does, but never present an opinion about how to fix the problem. Pretty effing typical.

Matt, do you know what professional jurors would amount to? A court room full of judges, an a very biased system. We all have to do our time on jury duty as a civic responsibility. You should understand something about responsibility, if you own a business - but your business can't be your ONLY responsibility. As an American, you have a responsibility to participate in jury duty when called - which obviously isn't often in your case - and I think that's a small price to pay for the freedom you have in this country.

The fact that you would behave the way you did is disgusting. You have every right to ask for an exemption from jury duty - which you probably would have been granted since you are the only employee for your business - but you have no right to decide you don't want to participate in something so crucial to our country.

Oh, and by the way, you sound like a creep - going to church to be "close to the women?" Yikes.

I think you're being a little harsh on Matt, jessiker. I understand what Matt was concerned about. I just disagree with the method he chose to deal with it. Perhaps more people would be willing to serve if they were paid their regular wages (which some companies do anyway) during their jury time. In Matt's case it sounds like his business would be detrimentally affected by his absence because he's it. The court would get that or the attorneys would, at the least, and use a preemptory challenge to excuse him. I don't know how to make this system better. I think it's the best in the world. Serving as a juror is one of the greatest acts of service to your country there is (aside from military service). Unfortunately, professional jurors would probably violate the constitutional right to a jury of one's peers. Professional jurors would not be peers. So I don't know the answer to this. Anyone else?

Jessiker - I was invited to attend church to watch a lady friend sing in the choir. I went, partially because I am enthralled by the woman, and partially to be polite by accepting the invite. I think that makes me a guy, and a polite guy at that. Maybe you could explain how that makes me creepy?
Lets take one more crack at this jury duty debate.
I am a firm believer in civic duty. The problem with jury duty is that it is not civic duty. It is civic servitude. Being forced to do one's civic duty? I thought we were a better country than that. The system will never change if we all go along blindly doing what we are told to do, without any effort to change the system for the better. I know my actions didn't do much, if anything, to change the system, but I feel better by not participating in an archaic system. I will never knock those that choose to play the game. If jury duty helps you feel like a better citizen, then go for it. With my blessing. But a system that can force a person's business into risk just isn't for me. There is enough risk involved in running your own business. It's just flat wrong to allow the court system to add to that risk.
There is a myriad of ways to perform one's civic duties, and I feel that I do my share.
I certainly could have sat thru the proceedings, and let a judge decide if my reasons were good enough to merit dismissal from this particular jury pool. How could I take that chance? If I guessed wrong, assuming that my reasons would be heard by a compassionate judge, then I could well lose my business. I know that these judges hear every excuse in the book. Was mine going to be good enough that day? Maybe, maybe not. That was a chance I was not willing to take. If that makes me a poor citizen in your eyes, I can live with that.
And yes. I could have handled the entire situation with much more decorum. But when your back is up against the wall, you are subject to making poor decisions. In that moment, at that time, I did what I thought needed to be done to protect my business. How many of you have had moments when you thought you could have handled a tough situation better than you did? All of you. Me too.

Did you actually contact the judge's office and explain the situation or did you just assume the worst? Why were you so certain it would be a two week trial and you would be selected and your business would go under? Or were these just hysterical assumptions?

We do need to pay jurors better but that would involve raising taxes and that kite won't fly. We also need to do our duty as citizens, even if it inconveniences us. We don't deserve our rights if we don't accept our responsibilities.

Why not avoid registering to vote? That takes you off the jury rolls and relieves you of any further civic involvement. Saves you wasting your time at the polls as well.

I was part of a jury pool several years ago on a trial that we were told would take two to three days.I remember thinking that the judge must have meant two to three days for both sides to present their cases.I may be wrong,but I thought that the trial wouldn't be over until the jury reached a verdict so technically the trial could last a lot longer than two or three days.
During the jury selection,the judge refused a rancher's request for being excused.The rancher told the judge he had field work that he should be doing.The judge asked him if he absolutely had to do his farming immediately or if it could wait.The rancher[being honest]said"well,yeah I suppose I could postpone it but it really should be done immediately".Maybe Matt's point about lying isn't so out of line,after all.I don't think the rancher was really mad until another guy got excused because he had a special elk permit that he had only a few days remaining to fill out....

On the other hand, if you look at it from the court's perspective, they have to fill that jury, and so many people come in there ready to lie their heads off that they have to be pretty tough or they could never get a jury. When I did my jury duty they told us from the start that it would be a 6-10 week trial, so you can imagine the amount of BS those guys had to listen to from people trying to get out of it before they could get their jury together. I think they called something like 600 people in order to get down to 12 jurors and 5 alternates for the trial. I have to say I think they did a great job. I had the utmost respect for everyone on that jury by the end of the process.

Amorette - It did end up being a 9 day trial, approximately what we were told. And jury rolls are now taken from a list of those that have a drivers license. The old system of using registered voters went away a few years ago.
I don't see the problem as being that I lied to get out of jury duty. The problem, as I see it, is that the system forced me to lie to get out of jury duy, or take my chances. Perhaps I am not seeing the problem correctly. Perhaps I am. But I know plenty of people who have resorted to a lie to get out of jury duty. You do too. They probably just don't go around telling you all about it. And therein is the crux of my problem. If I have an opinion, I'll tell you what it is. Some of my opinions are probably best kept to myself, so as to not offend the masses. Not many, but certainly some. I'll try to keep that in mind.

What system forced you? It's almost certain that if you are telling the truth about being a 1-person business you would have been excused from a 9 day trial. You never gave the system a chance to work. You went straight to lying.

Almost certain? Not good enough for me Levi. I'm sure the farmer in Kenny's post was almost certain tending to his crops would get him out of jury duty. Pretty good reason in my book. But it didn't. Yet the elk hunter with the time running out on his tag gets to walk? I believe that tells the whole story.

If the rancher needed to tend to his fields he should have said so. Instead he apparently indicated that he had flexibility in his schedule.

On the other hand, the hunter had a deadline, an investment (the price of the tag, at least), and had no control over setting/adjusting the deadline.

I'd say the system worked correctly in this case.

- Dave

I don't want to jump on the whole "let's bash Matt" (even if that is not what most people are doing) but I have to ask a question. Please understand Matt I mean no offense.

Have you ever taken a week's vacation? How about longer than a week? Reason I ask is if you were able to do that in the past why couldn't you attempt the so called "honest" approach? I know vacations are planned in advance but I would have to believe that once you received the jury duty notice you could have put all your clients on notice in case you were unable to get out of it. I have a feeling most would have understood your situation.

I too was once a single person business owner. I have served on juries before while owning my business and it was tough. I did let my customers know about the situation and all were willing to make accommodations.

You're right, Matt. You were extremely wise to come across as a redneck bigot before the jury selection even got underway because there's NO WAY any attorney would EVER weed someone as important as you out of the jury pool during the selection process. WHEW! You dodged a nine-day bullet there, buddy.

Well Dave,I think the rancher's statement "well,yeah I suppose I could postpone it but it really should be done immediately" spoke for itself.I think the rancher was saying that being self-employed,he could put things off if absolutely needed if there was no one else to take his place. At that time only one other prospective juror had been dismissed so he probably thought there should be plenty of suitable jurors available.
Yes the hunter had a timeline-if he didn't get his tag filled by season's end,he lost his tag money and some food.The rancher also had a timeline-if he didn't get his crops planted/cultivated/harvested at the correct time of season he stood to lose a whole lot more than the hunter.As far as an investment,comparing the price of a game tag to the price of one's livelyhood...........

Well poison s.,I know Matt and if I was an attorney I'd take people like him on my jury selection anyday if he was available.He's actually pretty intelligent and open minded but it appears that since he felt he couldn't take the chance of losing his business most folks here think he's the AntiChrist.He did what he thought he had to do under the circumstances.Oh I forgot-this is milescity.com-home of the perfectpeople.

Ken, no one has said that Matt is the AntiChrist... aren't you being a little dramatic? It's a good thing you're not a lawyer choosing people for jury duty if you would put him on a jury, considering how he acted. That's just wrong, plain and simple. What Matt did was wrong; the system is in place for a reason, and throwing a fit and looking like a complete jackass isn't going to do anything to change or better the system. While there are no guarantees, it's fairly certain he would have been excused considering that he's a one-man-business.

The reason the rancher didn't get excused is because he stated that he *could* postpone it, even though it SHOULD be done immediately. He could have just said no, being the only person that can do it and with the fact that it does need done immediately, he couldn't put it off at all.

And Wendy, you can feel I'm being harsh with Matt. I'm being honest. It's deplorable that anyone would behave the way he did, and then complain that he's being forced into something that is a responsibility that comes with the privileges of things like driving and voting. There's absolutely no excuse for it.

Now your just being a dick poison. In no way have I ever claimed I was too important to spend my time on a jury. Jesus dude. You really should put down the crack pipe.
I have taken several vacations, some lasting more than a week. It's almost not worth it. Some clients understand, some don't. A fair portion of what I do is time sensitive, as in, this needs to get done right now. When I leave, they then have to find someone else to do those rush jobs. I risk losing their business in the future if my replacement undercuts my fee's. Or kisses their ass better than I do. So anytime the competition visits my clients, that account is at risk. So jury duty for 9 days would put my business in great peril.
I'm not complaining. The same thing happens when my competition takes time off. And it's just the nature of the job. I knew what I was getting into 11 years ago. But my vacation time is something I can mostly control. Unlike jury duty.
It will always seem very strange that someone, with very little, if any say so on my part, can take me away from earning a living, for a time length yet to be determined. Hope it doesn't send you to the poor house Matt. But we need you to sit here for a while, making roughly $1 per hour, and then pass judgment on somebody you don't know. Please don't gloss over that part. I do not feel that I am qualified to pass judgment on others. Plain as day. The state may give me that power on a jury, but that doesn't mean I feel qualified to do so. The jury I did sit on many years ago, sent a guy to the big house for 5 years. I still lose sleep thinking about that. The guy was no doubt guilty, but 5 years for stealing a car? It was our only option if we found him guilty. That will always bother me. Yes I know. I am just another bleeding heart liberal.
Amorette, I appreciate that you advanced another possible solution to the problem. Maybe the answer is paying jurors what they would earn on the job. I know money is tight everywhere, but if it takes more money to run our justice system as fairly as we all want it to run, then don't we owe it to ourselves to find a way to make that happen? More money may not be the answer, but I don't see how we can take any possible solution off the table, without due diligence. Thank you for thinking about the problem, while some here can't get past thinking about how to gut me like a fish.

[This message has been edited by Matt Schmitz (5/5/2009)]

Right, Ken, and all the rancher needed to say was he definitely needed to be at work in the fields. Once he got a little wishy-washy with his answer, "Oh, sure, I suppose I could..." that was it for him.

I'm staring at a jury summons (King County, WA, Superior Court) right now. Here's what it says (in CAPS):

TO REQUEST AN EXEMPTION FROM JURY SERVICE
YOU MUST SUBMIT A WRITTEN EXPLANATION
SUPPORTING YOUR REQUEST (THIS MAY BE
EMAILED TO [blah].) ONLY THOSE VIEWED
AS UNDUE HARDSHIPS WILL BE GRANTED.
UNDUE HARDSHIP MEANS MORE THAN
INCONVENIENCE OR DIFFICULTY SERVING.
IT MEANS CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAKE IT
TRULY UNFAIR FOR YOU TO SERVE. MEDICAL
EXEMPTIONS REQUIRE A LETTER FROM A
DOCTOR.

- Dave

Thank you Kenny.

And this thread started off so well, too.

I agree with Matt on this point. In most service businesses, time IS your inventory. Being placed in a position where your time is "shoplifted" for issues like jury duty is a really problem. If you are the only one in your own business with billable hours, serving on a jury is a huge economic burden. Especially, since it is usually unknown how much time it will require. I'd be more willing to serve if they could guarantee that it would take 2 days of my time. The minimal compensation offered is not going to come close to replacing the income lost.

Been there, done that. Somehow my own economic survival was more important than being a part of deciding whether the Native American was drunk while driving. I was able to state my views of the case in a way so as to be certain I was excused.

Been there, done that. Somehow my own economic survival was more important than being a part of deciding whether the Native American was drunk while driving. I was able to state my views of the case in a way so as to be certain I was excused.

So you've decided to show your true colors, Richard. Very disappointing.

And you have decided to show your condescending nature again which is equally disappointing. Where is all the compassion you libs claim to have?

Everyday in Gallup, NM a jury finds a native american guilty of drunk driving. Everyday the judge slaps their wrist with a suspended sentence and no jail time. Its kind of a catch an release mentality which is the way things are in Drunktown USA.

It didn't make sense to me to spend a week listening to testimony at $5.25 an hour which won't go very far to pay my obligations when I am under contract with deadlines to meet and can make $65.00 per hour.

[This message has been edited by Richard Bonine, Jr (5/6/2009)]

Back to the original intent of the post, Montana got some national publicity out of this when Christie Lee read portions of the letter on the Bob and Tom Show this morning. The only disappointment was that Donny Baker didn't call in with some pithy and somewhat tasteless follow-up comments.

Any other Bob and Tom fans out there?

(Please consider this thread officially highjacked)

[This message has been edited by Big Dave (5/6/2009)]

And you have decided to show your condescending nature again which is equally disappointing. Where is all the compassion you libs claim to have?

Having compassion doesn't translate into being a sap, Richard. What I've always been curious about is why you conservatives - excuse me, libertarians - so often harp about rights and then lose interest when it comes to the responsibilities that go with them.

If you want the right to a trial by jury, you should be willing to serve on a jury yourself. End of discussion. Everything else is just useless bitching.

[This message has been edited by Brian A. Reed (5/6/2009)]

I don't object to Matt's not wanting to participate in jury service due to undue hardship - that's understandable. What I object to is his method. Getting up and proclaiming yourself to be a bigot is just asinine.

I don't object to Matt's not wanting to participate in jury service due to undue hardship - that's understandable. What I object to is his method. Getting up and proclaiming yourself to be a bigot is just asinine.

Agreed. If you have a legitimate reason for being excused from jury duty, you shouldn't have to rely on BS.

"If you want the right to a trial by jury, you should be willing to serve on a jury yourself. End of discussion. Everything else is just useless bitching."

Normally I would agree with you on this point. Somehow, in this particular case it didn't seem like a wise use of my time. When the judge routinely ignores the jurys' verdict and current law... somehow it seems pointless to set aside my own affairs. Somehow having to explain to the banker why I was short on accounts receivable and couldn't make his payment didn't sound like much fun either. You sort of had to be there...

Too bad you don't get to pick and choose.

Brian:

It's obviously not Ricardo's fault. It's the damn ACTIVIST JUDGES

If only the judge had a copy of the ten commandments on the wall ...

Somehow having to explain to the banker why I was short on accounts receivable and couldn't make his payment didn't sound like much fun either.

If you're living in a situation where the work you're currently doing is needed to cover current bills at your OMG SIXTY-FIVE dollars an hour rate; you need to hire a better accountant...
..
..
..
or take a math class. Just saying.

or change the number of dependents on your W-4.

or change the number of dependents on your W-4.

Nice!

"f you're living in a situation where the work you're currently doing is needed to cover current bills at your OMG SIXTY-FIVE dollars an hour rate; you need to hire a better accountant...
..
..
..
or take a math class. Just saying."

Yeah, I know you don't understand the world of natural resources consulting and that the fee's are WAY below your standard of living. But some of us have a vision for how we can make a difference. Speaking for myself it isn't about the money or lack thereof... it's about land stewardship any leaving things in better condition than we found them.

Yeah, I know you don't understand the world of natural resources consulting and that the fee's are WAY below your standard of living. But some of us have a vision for how we can make a difference. Speaking for myself it isn't about the money or lack thereof... it's about land stewardship any leaving things in better condition than we found them.

Whatever you've got to tell yourself to justify skipping your civic duty.

Wow. Ricardo's both a LIBERTARIAN and an ENVIRONMENTALIST

Easy, stomach.

Wow. Ricardo's both a LIBERTARIAN and an ENVIRONMENTALIST

Easy, stomach.

He recognizes only his own intrinsic value.

What does knowledge of natural resources consulting have to do with your inability to maintain a budget, on a 65/hr fee schedule, that does not allow for a couple weeks loss of income?

Matt, you say you are an officer if the court. I hope you do not take money from them for your servies. What crack pipe are you smoking. Hopefully, the day never comes when you are sued by one of your customers for an error or whatever. Your insurance carrier (if you have one) decides not to settle and you go to court and loose. What would your next complaint/excuse be? I lost because of an incompentent jury. My fellow business owners all got out of jury so I was left with people who are not has smart and ambitious has me? I don't know you and don't really care to. But if you lie to get out of jury duty, what lies are you telling to your customers just to get their business. Jury duty, taxes, traffic laws, property taxes are all part of our country live with them or leave.

Agreed. If you have a legitimate reason for being excused from jury duty, you shouldn't have to rely on BS.

Well put... and 100% correct, IMO.

Well put... and 100% correct, IMO.

I've got my moments.

I know Matt Schmitz. I went to school with Matt Schmitz. Matt Schmitz was a friend of mine. Scott P- You're no Matt Schmitz.

Maybe Richard needs to join the UAW and get himself a pay raise.

Mike, I never claimed to be Matt.(Period) I called it like I saw it. They also say a fruit doesn't fall from it's tree???

"Maybe Richard needs to join the UAW and get himself a pay raise.'

If that is my only choice, I'd rather be poor.

"What does knowledge of natural resources consulting have to do with your inability to maintain a budget, on a 65/hr fee schedule, that does not allow for a couple weeks loss of income?"

Oh goodie. I just failed the J. Dyba stress-test.

[This message has been edited by Richard Bonine, Jr (5/7/2009)]

Thanks Mike.

And Scott, if that was an attempt to disparage my family, or the Wallick family in any way, you are walking on very slippery ice. You can insult me 45 ways from Sunday, and I flat out don't care. I did what I did, and I can take the heat for it. But it sounds to me like you just insulted my family, or the Wallick family, and both are out of bounds. If that was not your intention, then you better think about what you post, and how it may be percieved by others before you submit it, or be willing to accept the consequences.

[This message has been edited by Matt Schmitz (5/7/2009)]

Ah, consequences. This should definitley push this thread over the 100 post mark by 9pm MST.

We definitely have a chance for threats of "in real life" violence. Always a good thing for keeping threads entertaining.

You tell me Levi. Re-read Scotts post, and tell me you would be fine if that was directed at your family, or a family you have known and respected for about 35 years. I know it's possible to fumble a post, having done it myself. We will see if this is a fumble, or was meant to be as insulting as it sounded to me.

I've read the thread and it has digressed from at least a semblance of discussion to the typical 6th grade "i'll meet you on the playground after school" internet fight. Matt did what he thought he had to do. I don't personally agree with it, in fact I think it is just plain and simply wrong, but thats the great thing about living in America. We can all disagree and nobody gets put up against the wall and shot. You can attack Matts patriotism, decency, and even intelligence, but it's not going to solve anything. Yes, Matt, the court system in America is broken, and evidently so is the jury selection process, you helped to prove that. I have lived as a citizen in two seperate countries, Germany and America, and I am more proud to be an American now, than I ever was as a German. I served in the U.S. Army and did three tours in Iraq. Of course I didn't lose my job for going to Iraq to perform my civic duty, but I lost friend and my fiance. So when you complain about possibly having to take nine days out of your life to perform a civic duty that requires no physical strain or risk to your life, I have a hard time thinking of you as a man. I know I just opened myself up for a bombardment of sophomoric remarks, but I had to speak my mind. To all the Vets out there, thank you for your service past or present.

Seth, I agree with your post. thank you to all of the Vets who gave all for this country.

Matt, The only Schmitz I know are the ones who owned Short Stop. Not even sure if they spell their name the same. But, a good family. I knew the Wallick who was/or still is the chiropractor. Good man. Not sure if they are related.

Apparently you don't like to be called on the carpet. Sounds like you want you cake and eat it to. For example. you state you are an officer of the court and take some pay from the "system" which is good to pay your bills. But if the "system" which pays you requests your services, you throw a fit and lie to get out of jury duty. What is completely wrong with this picture? Point is if you act like this in one part of your life, I would not hire you. Who knows what you would tell me to get my business.
I should of said birds of a feather... He was so antsy to stick up for you.
Are we still meeting after school?

Levi, the "Con-web" potential of this thread grows with every post.

Bridiger, I'm toooo old for all that fighting stuff. Oh hell, I'm to out of shape. I had to have some sarcasm though.

Yes Scott, that family that owned the Short Stop spells the last name the same as me. Thats how that family that owned the Short Stop taught me to spell OUR name. I agree, good family. And I grew up 3 doors from the Wallick family. Dr Wallick was my chiropractor. So I do know the Wallick family well. Good people, all of them. I really was hoping that your statement was just a poor choice of words. My family, nor my friends, are not responsible for my actions or words, in any way, shape or form. Birds of a feather is a much less inflamatory way to phrase your thought. You can flock me together with the Wallick family anyday. I appreciate that.

See what happens when people shirk their civil duty?

74 posts later, this.

Author: Amorette Allison: "We also need to do our duty as citizens, even if it inconveniences us. We don't deserve our rights if we don't accept our responsibilities"

"inconveniences"? I would think losing not only ones sole source of income but a venture you have quite likely poured a large portion of your financial capital into would be a /hell/ of a lot more than an "inconvenience".

Author: seth Posted: 5/7/2009 5:53:29 PM "I served in the U.S. Army and did three tours in Iraq. Of course I didn't lose my job for going to Iraq to perform my civic duty, but I lost friend and my fiance. So when you complain about possibly having to take nine days out of your life to perform a civic duty that requires no physical strain or risk to your life, I have a hard time thinking of you as a man."

Dude, its a /volunteer/ army. What you lose because you /volunteer/ to do something doesn't equal what someone loses because they were /drafted/ into doing something. I agree he could have handled the situation better but I think questioning his manhood is going a little far.

GJMEGA, You are an ungrateful b******, or whatever you are IMO, you have attacked Seth and countless other Veterans and current Service members. These brave people have and continue to provide you a way of life. It is not always about money but a sense of responsibility to your country. The most recent noteable was Tilman. So being "drafted" as you say to do your civic duty is a mere consequence to the life we all could have. While I will agree our system is not perfect, It is the one we have. Play in the sandbox or get the h*** out.

Scott - GJMEGA has made it perfectly clear that the only inconveniences s/he's concerned with are his/her own. We really shouldn't question that.

You sissy

Who were you directing that at, Douglas?

Man there's a lot of judgement on this post. Jurors are not supposed to be judgemental. Yet, some of you have judged one person or another on this post. What does that say about the penal system? I'm glad that I would never need any of you(those that passed judgement) on a jury for me or against me!
IMO there needs to be volunteers for jury duty, they could sign up much like one would for the armed forces, then if there was ever a desperate need for jurors, there could be a jurors draft.
I too believe in civic duty, but at what cost? Is it worth putting your life and the lives of your family and friends at risk? With the criminals that would do anything to get away with what they did?
The system is flawed. So lets stop forcing tax paying citizens to do something they don't want to do.

I can't help myself, I really thought this thread should have been loooong dead. trish while I may agree the system is flawed, it is still the system that we have. To have a pool of volunteer jurors seems nobale. Have you read the Constitution and State Laws which state you be tried (Judged) by a jury of your peers. Better yet, lets shoot them all and let someone sort it out. ( I didn't say the three letter word for Brians sake lol.) From the sounds of it you will live forever as you do no wrong and will never need a jury. Like I said before, if you don't like the rules of the sandbox, get the hell out.

Scott P:

Like I said before, if you don't like the rules of the sandbox, get the hell out.

This statement is not American. It reeks of totalitarianism, which also reeks. You paint yourself as the poster child of the American justice system and then blast anyone who might disagree with your beliefs? That ability to disagree is what this country is founded upon. Telling anyone to get out of your regime controlled sandbox is probably a waste of time. I don't think anyone wants to play with you anyway.


FH