Comments on: DC Superior Court Resonds to ‘Disrespecting the Jury’ Complaint

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:27:00 +0000

How in the world is complaining about the regulations going to end up with them going to jail?

By: Guest

Guest — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:07:16 +0000

Are you serious that 5 weeks is too long because it interefers with your personal life? In Federal District Court, grand jury duty can last a year or longer. It’s called doing your civic duty. It’s the point in the criminal justice process where the U.S. Attorney’s office decides whether or not to indict. If you want to help reduce crime in the community, you need to be part of the process. Or take your name off the voting rolls. Or stop whining. Or both.

By: Neighborhood Guy

Neighborhood Guy — Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:56:45 +0000

I understand the confusion since the court sends out the jury summons, but the proceedings are conducted at the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Regardless, a policy that mandates the checking of all devices at the door or completely banning them isn’t unreasonable since grand jury proceedings are SECRET. Keeping electronic devices out of the building will help grand jurors remain focused on the proceedings and reduce their ability (especially those who are addicted) to tweet about or photograph what is happening in the room. Granted, they could reveal information after they are excused (but would do so at their own peril), but I agree with the U.S. Attorney on this one.

By: monkeydaddy

monkeydaddy — Sat, 23 Jun 2012 03:40:12 +0000

Great response from the judge. And unless I misremember, the name of the representative from the US Attorney’s office (Cummings) is familiar from when I did a turn at Grand Jury service 7 years ago? If it’s the same guy, I thought he did a really good job of working with the Grand Jury AND the witnesses he brought in to testify for youth- and gang-related crimes. Seriously, the justice system might not be highly functional, but there are talented people working very hard within that system.

As to the merits of the original post: I am sure the courts would like to make it easier for jurors. Concierge treatment for your personal electronic device would be nice. But they don’t have the staff, the policy requirements are there for a reason, and I hope you have understanding bosses. If you don’t, the problem isn’t with the courts.

By: Louise

Louise — Sat, 23 Jun 2012 01:31:52 +0000

FYI- I’m currently serving on the Grand Jury for 3 days a week x almost 8 weeks! Current policy is no electronic devices but they can be checked at the door and retrieved at the end of the day only, not at lunch. There was no prior notification but I guess it’s OK since they allow you to check it and don’t send you home.

By: sparta

sparta — Sat, 23 Jun 2012 00:37:04 +0000

The confusion here in the original letter and in some of the comments reflects the tangled nature of DC as fiefdom rather than independent entity. I also just finished my 5 week tour of Grand Jury duty for DC Superior Court. But while felony cases are “state” cases that normally would be prosecuted on the state “Superior Court” level, that’s not the case in DC.

There are 350 Assistant US attorneys general assigned to prosecute cases for the “state” –or rather, non state. The Grand Jury meets in the US Attorney’s building. But we originally reported to the DC Superior Court.

We decide to indict or not based on evidence provided by Assistant US Attorneys general (federal) for state (DC) cases. We reported to the Assistant Attorneys General daily, not to the Superior Court, so it is understandable the Grand Jurors sent their letter to the Attorney General building. That said, Satterfield is a master and very sharp and I, too, applaud his reply.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 23:51:07 +0000

sounds like a good way to convert your jury duty into jail time

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 23:49:38 +0000

this was brilliant PR and I agree skillfully written to include plenty of condescending passive aggressiveness without being overtly rude.

i guess it’s not too surprising given that a big chunk of a judge’s time is spent writing decisions.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 21:38:43 +0000

Get working on that Constitutional amendment…

By: Marcus Aurelius

Marcus Aurelius — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 21:28:36 +0000

I commend the Judge for his thoughtful and thorough response. But these two letters seem to be talking past each other. The original complaint is about not being allowed to bring certain electronic devices into the D.C. Superior Court building. The Judge is talking about the policy prohibiting electronic devices in the US Attorney’s Office, which is a block away. Is the problem that grand jurors get notified of their service by D.C. Superior Court, which permits some electronic devices but they have to meet in the US Attorney’s Office, which permits no electronic devices? So you show up thinking one set of rules apply when in fact it does not?