Juries Quotations

It is apparent, if you go back through our history, that the grand juries of the criminal justice system do not value black lives.

Juries must, of necessity, be governed, in reaching many results through inferences from other facts, by certain laws of nature and human reason. They are often obliged to infer one thing from another, and this, whether that other be a fact direct or circumstantial.

I hated cracking the whip, and these juries turn into political things.

'CSI' has not only remained a top-rated show through seven seasons; it has had real-world consequences. Police and prosecutors complain of a 'CSI' effect' that leads juries to demand more physical evidence than they used to expect. College officials use the same term to describe spiking enrollment in forensic-science programs.

Putting pressure on grand juries to indict in my view is un-American. A grand jury should be allowed to be fair and impartial. They shouldn't have people yelling and screaming.

If we believe in our current penal process, then the penalties imposed by judges and juries should be the only sanctions for one's crime, not the invisible sanctions of the legislature.

If that was true, we wouldn't see any death sentences coming out of Texas unanimous jury required. We wouldn't see any death sentences coming out of California, out of Virginia, out of Georgia, where unanimous juries are required.

West Virginia juries are as sensitive to the rights of victims as any other juries in the country.

I think it's just something to mislead the jury. And I don't think there's a problem anyway, because very few juries ever acquit.

Such diverse juries deliberated longer, raised more facts about the case, and conducted broader and more wide-ranging deliberations. They also made fewer factual errors in discussing evidence and when errors did occur, those errors were more likely to be corrected during the discussion.

Like the two juries that have deadlocked in February 2005 and now April 2006, Tenet and the prosecutors disagree over whether anyone at Alvarado Hospital Medical Center intended to break the law when they recruited physicians to the fast-growing eastern part of San Diego County. Because there is no reason to believe any other jury would produce a different result, we earnestly hope that the prosecutors will decide not to re-try this case a third time. It's time for all of us now to devote our full energies to resolving the broader issues.

I think people who end up sitting on juries can do it. Lots can't; that's why they have (jury selection).

Juries will put the evidence in the context that is deserved, ... As a rule, I have confidence in the intelligence and wisdom of the jury.

Juries tend to be offended by the idea that consultants are watching their every move and predicting how they are thinking. Nobody likes feeling manipulated.

Juries often don't buy the idea that someone can't distinguish right from wrong.

Juries frequently confront contradictory information, especially in criminal trials. Juries then must sort through all of the evidence, sift and weigh it, resolve the contradictions as best they can, and reach a determination.

Juries don't like to say someone is not guilty, if they committed the crime, ... particularly if that crime was violent.

Juries are being presented a real mixed bag of evidence, where on one hand the person before them bears some direct responsibility for the crime that is committed, but on the other hand they're hearing evidence that this person was operating under either unlawful orders or mixed messages about what sort of job they were supposed to be doing.

Juries all around the country are sending a message that this conduct was not only totally inexcusable but that it was so outrageous, there is no amount of money that would be enough to punish the people who perpetrated it.

The prosecuting attorney dumped this case on the public when the responsibility belongs to the prosecuting attorney. Grand juries don't operate under rules of evidence, and they're going to be exposed to the evidence the prosecutor presents.

While in the Florida legislature, I strongly opposed the Stand Your Ground law because I believed it would provide defenses to people who had created the scenarios they sought protection from. Or it would leave juries without the proper rules of engagement that ought govern predictable human interactions.

We had the same responsibility as other jurors. Both of us had been on juries before and we took it seriously.

Is it any wonder that those who attack us feel they have a license to do so? A license to kill? Police won't investigate. Juries won't convict. The public still thinks our lives are a political issue, defined by the mythic "Gay Agenda." America. You Kill Me! America kills all of us.

I used to watch him practice. It was a sort of Jimmy Stewart style. Denis was a very soft-spoken, self-effacing, overly modest person who left many flashier lawyers in his wake as he persuaded judges and juries alike that what he said could be trusted and should carry the day.

Sometimes juries think the judge is part of the government.

Any test that turns on what is offensive to the community's standards is too loose, too capricious, too destructive of freedom of expression to be squared with the First Amendment. Under that test, juries can censor, suppress, and punish what they don't like, provided the matter relates to "sexual impurity" or has a tendency "to excite lustful thoughts." This is community censorship in one of its worst forms.

As a practical matter, prosecutors don't go to grand juries for a misdemeanor.

This is the first administration that I can remember, including Nixon's, that said we need to think about a law that would put journalists who print national security things up in front of grand juries and put them in jail if they don't reveal their sources.

This legislation will restore stability and predictability to our health care system when it comes to litigation. We won't see runaway juries driving up health care costs.

There's a real potential of criminal conduct here, there will certainly be grand juries looking at this,

All parties are trying to feel their way around and that includes how juries will react to their cases. It's only after you have a track record that you can really refine your strategy.

I took one look at him and I thought, 'Now, there's a young man who every mother on the jury will love,' ... Years later, that's proven to be true. ... He's a plain, honest person that juries instinctively trust - and actually, so do judges.

Any trial lawyer will tell you that juries have a life of their own.

I'm glad that we were finally able to try this case and get all the evidence out. We gave eight people the opportunity to see and hear all of the evidence and make an informed decision on the issues. We try cases to juries so that they're not tried in the evening news.

If citizens are allowed to lie with impunity, or encourage others to tell false stories or hide evidence, judges and juries cannot reach just results. At that point the courtroom becomes an arena for artful liars, and the jury a mere focus group choosing between alternative fictions,

The juries you draw in federal courts are more favorably inclined to institutional defendants.

All you ever hear about are cases where juries award $3 million, (but) those are very few and far between. I have been involved in this for over 20 years, and juries are very difficult to persuade to do anything other than what the evidence shows. They are not in the back room looking to give people a blank check.

The kind of evidence that was put before the jurors led to less-than-rational decision-making. I think that juries are composed of good people who can be misled.