Jury Duty-something that some voters try every trick in the book from which to get themselves eliminated. Living in a small community, I can expect (and so far I have never been let down) to receive the dreaded' selection card from my local court house every two years-regular as clockwork. Never one to shirk my civil duties, I always fill the card out and mail it back in a timely manner.
The workings of our judicial system have always fascinated me and I normally feel ok with serving as a juror when needed. If I didn't have such a low opinion of lawyers, I would probably have been an attorney. When I was very young and niave, I had dreamed of going to law school and becoming a female Johnnie Cochran or Racehorse' Hanes. As fate would have it, the closest I came to an attorney was sitting in the jurors' box and trying hard not to stammer when being questioned in the elimination process.
I have served on cases from civil suits involving pedestrians and cabs to criminal suits involving child abuse and assault with a deadly weapon. The last and most memorable case was a civil suit involving a child being struck and killed by an elderly motorist. This was the case that made me lose what faith I had left in our criminal justice system after the well-publicized OJ Simpson trial.
The issue came down to the financial settlement from the driver's automobile insurance and how much should be paid to the parent's of the little girl that was killed. The insurance company's attorney argued that the monetary value should be based on the fact that the girl was too young to be working and therefore there was no loss of income. She was not supporting anyone. There was no way to be certain that she would have lived a long and fruitful life had she not been struck down by the car-she may never have earned an income. And if she had, who was to say how much that income would be? Who was to say that she would not have chosen to be a stay at home mother? And who was to say that she would ever have been a mother anyway; she may have chosen to never marry or never have children? Vehemently we were told to base our decisions strictly on the facts and not the fantasies no matter that they sounded cruel and heartless to a layman's ear. It was the
law not feelings that had to take priority here! Yes, he admitted his client was a bit old to be driving, but he
did have a valid driver's license and it was an accident. The lawyer was very good-as lawyers go.
But, and here is where I couldn't get past the fact that this was someone's little girl, someone's baby. Here is where the law and I had a parting of the ways. What price can you put on the life of a child? How can anyone say, "This child has never earned a penny in her life, how can we say she is worth a million or two million or five thousand?" How can a little one be looked at as a debit and not an asset? She was a baby, for God's Sake! How can we put a price on that?
The family's attorney did a good job, as well. Pointing out these things to the jury; the premature loss of a loved one; what insurance companies are paid for; and arguments too numerous to remember.
Only two other jurors agreed with my point of view-the remainder feeling that adhering to the strict rules and regulations of the law of the land was their duty--so the family was awarded the bare minimum. They received enough to bury their little girl (having no insurance of their own) and probably would have a little left over as if that would make things right.
I wonder now, when I get that next card in the mail; will I, too, call in sick or have prejudices against the defendant, etc., etc. I lay awake many nights after that trial trying to find an answer to rights or wrongs there. I still see the little girl's picture-her last school picture-smiling broadly with two front teeth missing. Over and over the refrain runs through my head;
What price can you put on that? Sandra E. Graham, author,
Amos Jakey and
Nicolina thru American Book Publishing. Visit my website:
http://www.sandragraham-articles-books.com
