Pages

Thursday, August 06, 2009

Tick, Tick, Tick

The dreaded Jury Summons arrived in the mail. Sunday night I had to call the 24 Hour Information Line to see what I was in store for the next five days, starting Monday morning. The voice on the other end of the line told me I was on stand-by and to call in Monday at 11:30 a.m. Since I couldn’t risk gambling that I may or may not have to report at 9 a.m. Monday and since I didn’t want to put another person on standby to cover my shift, if needed, I had already arranged coverage at work. So, 5:30 p.m. Sunday, there I was, no work, no pay on Monday, stuck in limbo.

That’s the problem with stand-by. I can’t get started on any big projects sinceI may have to drop everything and have about an hour to get my behind downtown to report for jury duty, should the voice on the phone tell me to go. But there’s always too much to do so I can’t just kick back and figure I’m on vacation and grab a good book and go outside and sit on my yellow Adirondack chair in Kifani’s Corner, put my feet up and read. That would be slothful, somehow. So what I end up doing is piddling and frittering.

You know Piddle and Frittering; prune those overgrown bushes and haul the trimmings out to the recycle bin, get a cup of coffee, read a few sections of the Times, sweep the bedroom floor, drink a glass a water, go walk the dogs around the block, dust the furniture, eye the clock, stand in the middle of the room and look around, look at the clock again, 11:30, make the call. I’m on stand-by, again. Now what?

Then there’s the problem of previously made appointments, like the 6-months it takes to get an appointment to have my teeth cleaned. Do I cancel and risk that I’ll be told that I’m still on stand-by, thereby having to wait another 6 months for another appointment? Don’t call until it’s too late for the office to plug in another person?

Tick, tick, tick. Every day, a roll of the dice. Waiting for shoes to drop. Neither here nor there. Limbo Monday, limbo Tuesday, Limbo until 11:30 Wednesday, and then the blessed voice: Your service is over for another year. Dismissed early. Recess! Yaaayyy!

What makes this all so doubly frustrating – yes, yes, I know, civic duty, citizens’ responsibility, an honor to serve, yadda-yadda-yadda – is this: No DA or defense attorney will ever want me on any jury EVER. On the times I got dragooned and ended up downtown going through panel reviews, I could see them with their “lists,” checking off names, muttering. And during voir dire, it’s always the same. Speak my name and somebody politely remarks that they’re “familiar” with that name, heard me on the radio or read my column or blog or, perhaps, a snarky letter to the editor? ah, yes. . . her. . . . No way we want her on this panel, you’re excused, please return to the jury room, thank you.

So it’s always a complete waste of time. And the one time it looked like I might get chosen to serve on a panel, the judge just had to ’splain a set of overriding legal issues that perked my ears up and required – being under oath to speak truth – that I utter the dreaded words – jury nullification – and ker-BLAM! Thank you, you’re excused, please return to the jury room and don’t let the door hit you on the behind as you exit.

Not to mention the fact that I will no longer consider convicting anyone of simple drug possession or use since I believe our drug policies are absolutely insane and in desperate need of vast reform, which ain’t gonna happen since politicians can too easily demagogue the issue, the general public loves to be demagogued on the issue, plus there’s simply too much money to be made by all parties of the Drug War – cops, judges, prison system, Drug Lords, weapons manufacturers – it’s the perfect Military/Industrial/Judicial/Prison Industry/Drug Complex . So all I can do with that issue is a simple Right of Conscience – non serviam. (On the other hand, I have no trouble convicting someone for other crimes that may have been caused by and/or being under the influence, i.e. Walking While Stupid.)

So, all in all, putting me on jury duty call is a complete waste of everyone’s time. Tick, tick, tick.

“Why Did No One Rein In Wilcox Debacle?”

Asks this morning’s Tribune. Ah, good question. Far too late to ask and answer, in the case of Edge. He skated out the door with full benefits BEFORE the Robertson report revealed that he was “covering up” for Wilcox’s affair. O Lucky Man! Wilcox was fired for “cause.” Edge wasn’t. In his dismissal, the BOS blathered on about a change in philosophy, yadda-yadda. What they should have done is either censure him for his failure to blow the whistle on Wilcox when it became clear to him that she had an affair with Perry or fire him “for cause,” sans nice benefits package, just like they did with Wilcox.

What remains now is to figure out why officials in positions of responsibility for dealing with, uh, employees’ behavior/ethical conflict issues, turned a blind eye. And whether the county has some sort of early warning system to determine if alcohol is becoming a problem for employees, since so much of the Robertson report seems to involve Wilcox and “drinking.” Was that a culprit in some of Wilcox’s more troubling behaviors? According to the Tribune story, people responsible are now busy covering their behinds and pointing fingers, including pointing to the previous Supervisors. And round and round we go.

On August 3, Jay Salter had a letter to the editor in which he compared the “Wilcox Tragedy” to Greek drama. “The trio’s performance may be judged as either satiric farce of a public display of human suffering of near Aristotelian proportions. But since I have a workplace acquaintance with each of the players, I see the entire affair as painful tragedy. These are star-crossed beings, each suffused with colossal hubris and each exhibiting achingly “fatal” flaws.

“They are us, writ large, and deserve far more compassion than derision.”

My reply to Mr. Salters apt observation is as follows:

“ . . .[while] the Wilcox/Edge/Perry triangle was nearly Greek in its dramatic proportions. Since nobody died, it can’t be classified as a classic “tragedy,” no matter how painful it has been, so “satiric farce” or classic “comedy” would be closer to the mark.

In reality, I suspect what ultimately happened here was even more simple than Greek drama: Edge and Wilcox were exceptional people who made the mistake of thinking they were The Exception. That delusion always leads to disaster, as this unexceptional case so sadly illustrates.”

And, as usual, the taxpayers are gonna eat this one.

12 comments:

Ron said...

Ann wrote:

"“Why Did No One Rein In Wilcox Debacle?”

Asks this morning’s Tribune
"

I'm so glad you brought that up.

I have a question: Can Bob Cuddy read?

He wrote, "The Robertson report identifies several people who knew that Edge’s behavior was making Wilcox uncomfortable. Among them are Dori Duke..."

And, the Robertson report states (and I'm not making this up): "Duke is emphatic that she does not believe any discussions between Edge and Wilcox actually were harassing, because Duke believed the conversations were welcomed by Wilcox."

YIN:

"The Robertson report identifies several people who knew that Edge’s behavior was making Wilcox uncomfortable. Among them are Dori Duke..."

YANG:

"Duke is emphatic that she does not believe any discussions between Edge and Wilcox actually were harassing, because Duke believed the conversations were welcomed by Wilcox."

Uhg.

As for jury duty... four words:

"Extreme financial hardship" card

Mike Green said...

Jury Duty,
Once I got called up to sit for a jury selection process where the case was the penalty phase of a murder trial.
There must have been a hundred folks in the courtroom, all called up out of their respective lives for three days of questioning and screening by the attorneys and the judge, we were taken into a room one by one and asked questions about our opinions on the death penalty and related topics.
When my turn came I told them that I wasn't completely comfortable with the death penalty as it was applied in California because as far as I knew the chance of finding a panel of "peers" that had some kind of reference about murderers was farfetched at best, I told the judge that handing down punishment was HIS job, not mine and that if chosen for the panel I would vote to hang the jury regardless of majority opinion.
Needless to say, the judge and prosecutor were less than enthusiastic about me being on the panel.
Then came the selection process where we were called up randomly in the courtroom, when you were called you took a seat in the jury box, if there was no challenge from either attorney (preemptory challenge) and no good reason from you to get excused, there you stayed, for the whole shebang.
Each side got a set amount of challenges, my name was called and I got the last preemptory challenge.
The next person called had to stay.
After that, I made sure to stand, and like Ron says plead financial hardship, I didn't get paid for jury duty, unlike some Government employees and at that time employees of large corporations like PG&E.
Even then, the process caused havoc with my work because if I was on standby I couldn't schedule any repairs or services.
I guess it's a small price to pay for our judicial system, but I do think it could be tweaked some to make it fairer for more people to participate.

Alon Perlman said...

The Dramatic requirements are met;
1. A relationship triangular, but not equilateral
2. Sin, Sex, Secrets, Confessions and Power
3. Lust, Distrust, Vicarious living, Betrayal
4. Oedipal flavor, Platonic relationship as a dramatic balancer to a physical one.
5. Genuine human elements gone sour (audience empathy)
6. Genuine crisis developing through discovery-A personal ethical dilemma, an apprenticeship where the successor is found wanting. Self doubt, internal and external conflicts. Time for a soliloquy; to cover-up or not to-cover up
7. Dramatic setting (back-drop)-A time of crisis in the State, War, A new emperor is crowned, New edicts are pronounced and the changes are stirring the province government. The succession to the (Staff) throne is imperiled.
8. The Yin Yang thing, but more than just as opposites or Man-Woman, but in the form of Warrior versus Wise statesman. Impulsive and aggressive versus measured and negotiating. Student Vs teacher. Private lives versus public lives. Co-dependency. Etc… dynamic tension.
9. The basics of timeline and plot development are strong.
10. Other stuff that people who paid attention in high school may know about.

Outside of those dramatic elements; This has to be fascinating because it is also practical news- County budget is affected
Even real life has the style of Audience participation Theatre; this is happening in real time, altering a future balance of power in the real world. And it's happening to people we know or know of. Boundaries have been breached.

In Greek theatre there is a choir which in repetition and narrative supply additional plot. We now have blogs in addition to newspapers and the old fashioned direct mouth to ear, repeat. The ability to exchange information over this web, is an additional form of the total narrative. I’m a million years out of the classroom but I believe that the Greek choir was occasionally cryptic but never misleading. Mr. Edge’s web presence (response on a blog) legitimizes the influence of the web while pointing out that it is possible to discern chunks of truth in a stirred kettle of guesses, lies and innuendo.

All the world's a stage

A theater in the round as Shakespeare’s plays were originally presented, the actor kicks at a piece of rotten fruit hurled on the stage and it becomes a part of the play.
I'm not researching, but I kinda half remember that there is a change in perception of the individual's ability to control their own destinies, between the Greeks and Shakespeare. Fate that is more powerful than the gods Versus the inability by individuals to break unhealthy habits and fixations.

In some of his plays Shakespeare had several conflicting narrators telling the same story with critical departures from each other, altering our ability as an audience, to know the “truth” (Also- Rashomon, Kurasawa). Here we pretty much know what happened, though it’s still a He said-She said. Hand wringing a spot that cannot be wshed out, And yet no blood is shed, and the web untangles fairly easily. (un redacted reports) Midsummer night’s dream?

And that comes back to the final comment by Ann-Simpler than a Greek Tragedy- I also see two people (plus one) who started onto a slippery slope (Alcohol lubricated?) and gradually and mostly incrementally found themselves at the bottom.

Disclaimer; I haven’t read the Robinson report entire, I’m waiting for the prurient interests Cliff notes version to come out.

Civic Duty? -Exclusive care of a depenendant this time around. (Though dogs are people too). I suspect I would actually be excluded due to knowing more about DNA evidnce then is expected, happened to a Lab co-worker. It is a process that is too costly for even willing participants.

Churadogs said...

Mike sez:"Even then, the process caused havoc with my work because if I was on standby I couldn't schedule any repairs or services."

For me, stand-by was worse than spending the day downtown. For one, you're not paid for standby so I lost a day of work since I didn't want to have another co-worker standing by on standby because I was on standby -- not fair to involve yet another person. And, as you say, you can't really get much done waiting for that call. If you're dragooned downtown you get paid a bit plus I find the whole process fascinating. And listening to fellow jurrors getting "vetted" is a wonderful reminder of just how rich and varied and funny and complex and tragic all our lives really are; There is no "Common Man." We are all astonishingly unique in so many ways.

But, you're right, the whole process needs to be tweaked. Years ago, in L.A. County, you reported daily for 7 days. Period. End of sentence. No stand-by. Sat in the huge jury room downtown for days. (And in those days people smoked . . . in the jury room. Koff-koff.) If you got a trial on day one that lasted two days, you went back to the jury pool. It was grim. Interesting, but grim. So, I shouldn't complain about this set up. Next year, though I may just go bother a co-worker and make her standby while I stand by; Gamble on not getting called up that day.

Alon, your riff was wonderful! This sad tale does, indeed, have it all, mercifully minus a dead body, just dead careers and marriages. But go ahead and read the Robertson report. It's not purient, just pathetic, but it's really illuminating in many ways about how various employees interact at the top level, and how that may have led to this problem getting out of hand. It's possible if somebody at HR had been doing her job, and one BOS official had been paying attention, some of this mess could have been prevented; something the BOS need to think about before hiring new "at will" CAOs.

And, yes, that slope is always subtle and slippery, which is why I suggest that all county employees in management positions should attend some kind of modified 12-step program every few months. It's not the alcohol (though that undoubtedly didn't help in this case) it's the Ego; Exceptional people who think they're The Exception. 12-steps help with that delusion.

Or maybe attend my "Mother Calhoun Explains It All For You "My, My Aren't YOU Special" Reality-Check Clinic" twice a year?

M said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
M said...

Awhile back, I was called to jury duty. Being the procastinator that I am, I failed to find an ear doctor in time to get confirmation that I was hard of hearing. So I went when I was supposed to and at the first opportunity tried to inform the Judge of my situation. I was told to wait until my turn at the jury box and then bring it up. This also took me into the next session after lunch. When it finally was my turn to get as it turned out into the #12 chair, neither attorney chose to ask me any questions. While asking six or eight others in the box questions. The next thing I know, they're about to wrap this up and make we 12 the jury panel. When I got their attention and reminded them of my hearing problem the Judge asked "couldn't you use a hearing device?". When I stated that I had never used one before, and did not have one, the Judge stated they would provide one for me. Keep in mind, they hadn't asked me a single question yet. Finally one of the attornys suggested they remove me. Wisely, they did. The accoustics in that room were terrible for hearing speech.
On a side note, the case was against a male for battery on his wife. Curiosly the Judge was a female, both attornys were female.
Sincerely, M

Churadogs said...

M sez:"On a side note, the case was against a male for battery on his wife. Curiosly the Judge was a female, both attornys were female.
Sincerely, M"

And if you are a female, that'd be a trifecta. Or quartofecta or something.

M said...

I'm not sure what your inference regarding my observation is Ann, but to be clear, wife beating is not a subject to be agreed with or not. It is simply unacceptable. Actually, I think that mental abuse has even more far reaching implications. It is not visual to an observer and can be devastating to whom it is inflicted on.
My observation was that the charged party had not yet been proven to actually have committed the crime yet. Cynical bastard that I am, it seems to me that the decked might have been slightly stacked against him. Remember, I was nearly selected for that jury with NO questions asked of me. I guess my face just exudes compassion and justice.
Sincerely, M

Alon Perlman said...

12 Angry men?
A Jury of one's peers?
Where will you find 12 superbowl ring wearing men whose name is Orenthal?
Are the statistics that most jurors are women nowadays still holding? once chattell, now statistically biassed by a narrowing life expectancy difference and economics.
The ability of the solicitors to challange individuals from the pool sequentially and "run out" of objections by the time they get to uninterviewed juror candidates is insane. Both Mike G and M reported on this practice.
The same system could exist with rankings. The lawyers could exclude their worst rated jurors from the pool after they have interviewed a sufficient number of jurors. Even if the selection takes a few days other arrangements could be used to release people early. Especially if there are "Fourth Estate Untouchables" (an up-side to noteriety?)
word verification: cract
As in-the system is...

M said...

Alot of things wrong with the system, but at least we don't take them out and shoot em after a 30 minute trial. Though quite a number of them would not be missed by society.
Sincerely, M

Churadogs said...

M sez:" I'm not sure what your inference regarding my observation is Ann," and sez"My observation was that the charged party had not yet been proven to actually have committed the crime yet. Cynical bastard that I am, it seems to me that the decked might have been slightly stacked against him."

You implied "deck stacking," i.e. three woman on a wife battering charge, so I simply observed that had you been a woman it would have been 4 - 1, instead of 3 - 1.

Alon Sez:"The ability of the solicitors to challange individuals from the pool sequentially and "run out" of objections by the time they get to uninterviewed juror candidates is insane. Both Mike G and M reported on this practice.
The same system could exist with rankings. The lawyers could exclude their worst rated jurors from the pool after they have interviewed a sufficient number of jurors."

I'm assuming lawyers Google (or some other version) every name in the jury pool so they have a pretty good idea of who you are before you ever show up. In a high profile trial they REALLY research you first. In the case I was called on, the attorneys on both sides and the judge seemed to know who I was, at least by name, (as Alon calls it, "Fourth Estate Untouchable.")which is why I should be excused permanently since I"m sure to be persona non grata by everyone. Eeeeuuuu, get HER outta here!

M sez:"Though quite a number of them would not be missed by society."

If we, as a society, took better care of US (early childhood intervention, better mental health care, a sane drug treatment program, stop using prisons as mental wards, better school training and a culture that actually cared about one another,) then whoever did land in the prison-mode=Dust Bin, yeah, not missed at all.

But we don't care about one another and we live in a throw-away society and that includes throw-away people and we use the prison system (including privitized, big money in that game)as our collective garbage can. Then whine about China's "human rights violations, eeeuuuuu."

Feh.

M said...

Ann, I still think you implied more than your words.
Your "early childhood intervention" is troubling. We've started doing that in the last 20 years or so and now we have children turning into adults that now somehow have to find their way without whatever medication they were taking to control their childhood behavior. If you actually meant early childhood intervention by the parents in the form of teaching responsibility and how to act properly, then that is different.
Just out of curiosity, what percentage of your income and life are you willing to sacrifice to help everybody in this world? I have enough trouble keeping myself above water to be to concerned about someone elses well being. So my percentage is probably about five. It's not that I don't or have not helped people, i'm just not nieve enough to think that I could make a difference in this world. Maybe some can, but not me.
Man has been beating up man since day one. I don't see that changing. My theory is that the first haircut came about after one caveman smashed another cavemans scalp with a sharp rock. The assaulted cavemans friend then said "that looks pretty good, but could you take a little more off the top!
Sincerely, M