I'm sorry whose every day this is to do lecture notes but I just wanted to say that the movie "A Time to Kill" that we were talking about today was on T.V tonight. Haha :)

Dr. Allred met his wife in a class which 3 professors taught and one of them included his father. His father told most of the students which Dr. Ammon was not happy about because the female students were trying to talk to him because they figured he would give them correct answers however his study habits were terrible at the time. Once he was 20 minutes late and there was a free phone you could use and his dad says “Ammon is not here, heather do you mind calling Ammon?” She already horrified and writes the number on the board and she already took off because she already knew his number. The pattern follows that the questions that Dr. Ammons father wrote are the only questions Mrs. Allred did not understand.
Jury Selection: Last Monday we talked about the Historical role of juries and how they arose. Monday I asked you guys two things that are important. What if you had a method to verify the truth better than the jury? Like a truth serum. It’s like the finger print method used or poly graphing. In most major cities as London video cameras are ubiquitous. Although we don’t have the truth serum and we never will. But this might be a way where the experts can tell the truth better than we do. Finding the facts is only one part of the jury’s job. Interpretation of the Law is up to the Judge not jury. Jury’s however are in charge of interpreting the facts. You can say smoking causes cancer. What that means is people who smoke have cancer. However if you smoke and get cancer that your smoking caused it.
By not letting the jury contextualize the facts the judge puts his own corporate bias in action. Judges contextualize by using the law but juries contextualize using facts. There is a different between fact finding and deliberate cruelty. Juries predate democracy. If you are a judge in Britain you technically are a member of the house of Lords. The monarch was the administrator judge and monarch of the law. The Lord would hold court the Kind didn’t want to do these things. If you’re not an aristocrat it’s pretty clear that the aristocracy is out to get you. So in an aristocrat I know that the judge is out to get me because he doesn’t care about us common folk. At first the jury did whatever the king or Lord wanted them to do. At one time it was a crime not to do what the Lord said. However you took ownership of the decision you took. When did we decide law comes from the government? The jury proceeds government. Once the peasants stop doing whatever the Lord’s want then it the situation changed. It made it be that now those in power don’t make decisions but our peers.
A juror is a citizen in a different sense then a voter. Executive does the job of government. Executive is the quote unquote government. The government doesn’t end when Bush leaves and Obama takes over, or when Obama leaves or Clinton takes over because there will be the same people. However if Sarah Palin takes over after Barack then the world will come to an end.
Just like in Britain the Queen is the government of the people.
What about the legislature. Do I vote for them? Sure I voted for Marcy Kaptur and I mostly agree with her. However even if I didn’t vote for her she would still win. Joe the plumber said he was going to win. Well you see what happened to that.
If I’m being sued by a big corporation they are traverse they are already familiar with this type of work. They are repeat players and I’m a one timer. What counts as a peer is always discussed. Race, Gender, and Class is brought up most often.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License