Contents
=> “Jury Duty: Pre-Reading Discussion Questions”
=> “Kevin’s First-hand Jury Duty Experience” - text and vocabulary
=> “The Jury Duty Test” - gap-fill activity
=> “An Occurence at Los Gatos Cinema” - an anecdote
=> Welcome Subscribers from Saudi Arabia
=> In the Next Issues

This issue of “ETs” features a text about American law. We hope it proves useful–or at least entertaining–to those studying legal English, or to those with an interest in America, or to those with an interest in the events of Kevin’s life.

———————————————————————–
“Jury Duty: Pre-Reading Discrussion Questions”
———————————————————————–

Discuss these before reading the text, or, give them out ahead of time so that students might do research.

1. How are juries selected in your country?
2. Do you know anyone who has served on a jury?
3. Do you think it’s a good system to have regular people decide who is guilty and who is innocent?
4. Should juries or judges decide who is guilty and who is innocent?
5. Do people in your country trust the legal system?

———————————————————————–
“Kevin’s First-hand Jury Duty Experience” - text and vocabulary
———————————————————————–

VOCABULARY
the People = the public. Let’s say some Mr. Jones is charged for a crime. Then the case is titled “The People Versus Jones.”
prosecution = the lawyer(s) representing “the People,” those seeking a conviction.
defense = the attorneys who defend the accused.
the accused/the defendant = the person accused of the crime; the person on trial.
jury = the group of 12 regular citizens who decide the outcome of a court case.
jury box = where the 12 jurors sit.
peremptory challenge = a lawyer’s right to excuse a member of the jury during the selection process.
prospective = likely to be or become. A prospective juror is not a juror yet, but has the potential to become one).
summons = a written paper calling a defendant, witness, or juror to appear in court.

My First-hand Experience with Jury Duty
by Kevin McCaughey

Almost as soon as I got back from Russia, I received a jury summons. I had to report to the city courthouse for jury duty.

The first day there was a lot of waiting around. Then we were assigned to a judge and a courtroom, and we answered a few questions.

The second day all 60 of us prospective jurors returned to the courtroom. At random, the names of 24 people were selected. The first 12 selected took seats in the jury box toward the front of the courtroom. Then twelve more names were called–the alternate jurors. I was #13, which meant that I would move up to the jury box if anyone was excused. The judge questioned all twelve jurors to see if they could be objective and fair and reliable during the course of the trial. Juror #4 just started crying, and so the judge excused her. Our case was sensitive, since it involved a defendant who had been convicted child abuse. With the crying lady gone, I was asked to move into her seat, and I became juror #4. A couple more people were excused and then replaced by alternates.

After lunch, the process of jury selection became really interesting, even exciting. At this point, the attorneys were allowed to question us, and then, if they saw fit, excuse us. Each side–the prosecution and the defense–is allowed 6 peremptory challenges. That means they can each remove six prospective jurors. And they don’t need to offer any explanation. Naturally, each attorney is trying to get a jury that will be the most advantageous to his side of the argument.

The defense excused juror #7, an emotional Asian women who said (quite rightly) that no children deserved to suffer. The prosecution excused Juror three, a young female who herself was studying to be a lawyer. The defense excused another woman. So far the score was:

Defense: 2 peremptory challenges
People: 2 peremptory challenges.

Things were getting intense. It was a battle. A chess match. But so far I had survived.

At this point the prosecution said it was satisfied with the jury as it was. Hurray! The whole process had been so fascinating that I really wanted to be there for the trial. I also was rooting for juror #12 to make it; her name was Tina; she was attractive.

But the defense was NOT satisfied with the jury. The attorney excused Juror #6, a very old Mexican-American in a cowboy shirt. He said, “Go home?” and everyone laughed. But somehow, the Mexican’s departure upset the balance that the prosecution had accepted a moment before. The prosecutor said, “The People excuse Juror number 4.” That was me. I was gone. I never saw Tina again.

I hope I will get selected for jury duty again. It’s a civic duty, we’re told, but it’s also just really interesting. Besides, you get paid $15 dollars per day. That’s almost 2 dollars per hour.

———————————————————————–
“The Jury Duty Test” - True or Outlandish?
———————————————————————–

outlandish = bizarre, conspiculously unconventional, strikingly unfamiliar

If the sentence is True (T), well, jolly good. If it is Outlandish (O), correct it while pitting a smirk of disapproval on your face.

1. When you are called to court, either as a witness or a prospective juror, you receive a notice in the mail called a “Free Ice Cream Coupon.”
2. The name for a person sitting on the jury is a penguin.
3. The man or woman who sits at the bench (a raised desk) and presides over the court is the Emporer Penguin.
4. A jury in the USA consists of 1200 people.
5. The prosecution represents the Animal Kingdom.
6. Another name for the defendant is “The dork.”
7. Coffee is dark and groovy and gets me high.

———————————————————————–
Answers to: “The Jury Duty Test” - True or Outlandish?
———————————————————————–

1. O
not “Free Ice Cream Coupon” but jury summons.
2. O
not a penguin but a juror .
3. O
not Emporer penguin but judge .
4. O
not 1200 but 12.
5. O
not the Animal Kingdom (unfortunately) but The People.
6. O
not “the dork” but the accused .
7. T and 0
Clearly the statement is true, but in light of our legal discussion it’s fairly outlandish. Thus, both answers are acceptable.

———————————————————————–
An Occurence at Los Gatos Cinema” - an anecdote
———————————————————————–

I took my mom to see the movie March of the Penguins at the Los Gatos cinema, not far from our home in Saratoga. The girl behind the counter looked like the Romanian girls I had taught in Moldova. I asked her if she had any Romanian ancestry. She said, no. I said, “Sorry, but you look like some of my Romanian friends.” She said, “You look like my Russian friends.”

[By the way, in Russian, an anecdote is usually a joke. In English, it’s only a description of an incident. The incident is often amusing, but doesn’t have to be.]

———————————————————————–
Welcome subscribers from Saudi Arabia!
———————————————————————–

On September 2nd, Kevin returned from two intensive but rewarding weeks in the KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia). He met with great warmth and generosity in his two weeks there. Because Saudi teachers tend to like “data shows,” or PowerPoint, they can look forward to “ETs” #87, and a topic inspired by Kevin’s experiences in the KSA.

———————————————————————–
in the Next Issues
———————————————————————–

The Academic year is starting (in most places), so we’re going out strong in September with three issues.

“ETs in Russia” #86 on Sept 16th:
Hip and Irritating Expressions
Lay-Lie Language Lesson

“ETs in Russia” #87 on Sept 25th:
“PowerPoint Games”