It would have been so weird if Taylor Swift was sitting at home, in her rented New York apartment on Sunday night, watching the VMAs go down. I’ll admit, my mind wandered a few times and I thought, “Hm, is Taylor reading the tweets right now?” She was like the Ghost of VMAs Past, haunting Madison Square Garden. As it turns out, Taylor was not in New York on Sunday. She flew to Nashville over the weekend, and she reported for jury duty bright and early Monday morning. Seriously! You know how we know? Because the other people in the potential jury pool were tweeting about her and outright tweeting photos of her. So here are a few things I’ve learned.
Taylor votes! I always wondered if Taylor even bothered to vote, but now we know – she’s registered to vote at her Nashville address. I wonder how many times she’s voted? I’ve voted at my current address for years, and I’ve never been called in for jury duty, ever. I honestly think I never make the cut because of my foreign-sounding name.
Taylor doesn’t ask for special treatment. That we know of! The way it looked on social media, Taylor arrived sans entourage, low-key with little-to-no makeup, and she talked to everyone, took selfies, signed autographs and didn’t seem to “pull rank” at all. The only thing out-of-the-ordinary was that she did have security guards in the building, but not in the jury selection room.
How does she define herself? During voir dire (where lawyers question jury pool members directly), Taylor was asked what she does for a living. She could have said “pop star” or “singer” or “Professional Snake Emoji.” But she said “I’m a songwriter.”
She’s not impartial. Per local Nashville media: “When asked, Swift tells prosecutor she is involved in civil sexual assault case that hasn’t gone to trial yet but says she can be impartial.” That’s the case about a radio host allegedly groping her and she got him fired and now he’s suing her. Apparently, the judge disagreed with Tay-Tay though – the judge thought her involvement in the lawsuit meant that she could not be impartial, so she was dismissed for cause.
Taylor was dismissed within a few hours. She did her civic duty, she went through several rounds of voir dire, and she was not selected for the trial. What was the trial? It was a case involving multiple charges of rape, aggravated assault and kidnapping. Yikes! I thought it was going to be, like, petty larceny or something.
So, is this just the kind of news cycle Taylor needs? As others have pointed out, many can take a pass on jury duty if they’re busy, and reschedule for another time. Apparently, Taylor was called for jury duty last December, but she couldn’t make it because she was on tour. So did she pick a certain moment when she knew she needed a good new cycle? Hm.
.@taylorswift13 reports for jury duty in Nashville https://t.co/KxLDWgRZER pic.twitter.com/4On7uiFsNg
— Stereogum (@stereogum) August 29, 2016
Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet, Twitter.
What even is jury duty?
We’re entitled to a jury of our peers if we choose in both criminal and some civil cases. The jury consists of regular people who have to sit through the trial, listen to the evidence, meet, discuss what they heard, and then, following the judge’s instructions, vote on whether the alleged facts of the case were proven.
In the US, criminals are tried/prosecuted in front of a judge and a jury. The jury is 12 people chosen from the surrounding population and selected by the attorneys/barristers/lawyers. Jury duty means you’ve been selected as a potential juror/member of the jury for a particular case/crime and you have to go to court and be questioned by the attorneys and judge to determine if you can fairly listen to the evidence provided for and against a criminal, and then decide (along with the other members of the jury) the persons guilt or innocence. The jury says a person is guilty or not guilty, the judge decides the punishment if someone is found guilty. It’s tons more complicated, of course, but that’s the basic gist.
The modern jury system in the UK & US is based on changes in English law in the 12th C under Henry II which brought in trial by jury, though is believed to be influenced by Islamic law (via the Normans in Sicily). There were similar practices in German tribes and going back to Ancient Greece.
Becky, it’s not possible to reference “the UK” in this respect. Scotland has 15 members on a jury, not 12 – thought to be the world’s largest number of jurors – and there are three possible verdicts, guilty, not guilty and the controversial not proven. It retains its own legal system. I assume that being called for jury duty is the luck of the draw – my daughter has been called twice, I never have been. Or maybe the word is out….
The jury is not always 12 people. It depends on the jurisdiction. I know from years of CourtTV watching (RIP!) that some states have as few as six on the jury, and the Supreme Court has said that is OK.
Annetommy, that’s why I said “based on”. I’m aware Scotland has its own legal system (and education system), a compromise of the 1707 union. Northern Ireland also has its own system. And yes the 12 person jury isn’t the only type.
What I was trying to suggest (without being rude) is that I don’t think a lot of Americans realise that US law is based on English law.
In America criminal and civil cases are tried before a jury of one’s peers, a group of citizens randomly selected (often from voter registrations) who listen to the whole case, secretly deliberate, and then decide the outcome of the case. Jury duty is when you are randomly selected to be available to serve on a jury. It’s notoriously a pain in the neck and many people bend over backwards to get out of it. Just because you are selected for jury duty doesn’t mean you’ll necessarily be on the jury as potential jurors can be eliminated for basically any nondiscriminatory reason.
We have jury duty here in the UK, too. We get chosen at random by computer and must do it by law, with few reasons for an exception. If your employer won’t pay you for the period (usually two weeks) then you claim loss of earnings and other expenses.
We don’t really have the voir dire system here though, where prosecution and defence try to get the most sympathetic jury possible. A few cases might see some jurors excluded for various reasons but it’s very limited.
I’ve done it twice. One time, I just sat and read my book in the jurors’ room for the whole first week and didn’t get called at all. All in all, I sat on three cases which took up 8 days of the 20 I had to make myself available for. I’ve helped acquit one man for assault. I’ve helped convict a woman for fraud (fraud evidence is the most boring thing in creation). I’ve helped acquit another man in another assault case when I thought he was probably guilty but the police had done such a poor job with the evidence that beyond reasonable doubt wasn’t anywhere near met. That last one was annoying.
Sixer, I’ve never done jury duty, but is the use of phones prohibited. I don’t understand the woman who took pics with Taylor and posted them online where other jurors could have been identified?
This was jury selection and not actual jury duty yet, so there may be more relaxed rules on phones.
Sequestration (removing the jury from all contact from outside world – live in hotels, no phones, email, etc) is quite rare.
@Becky, those pictures were taken in the waiting room and nobody had been selected for the jury yet. Also, the names of jurors are public information in most states, although there may be rules about when that information can be released. Some courts don’t prohibit cameras or phones, others do. It is up to the courthouse.
Becky – here in the UK, we can have our phones and tablets and laptops with us right up until selected for a trial. Then the court officials lock them away while you’re sitting. So pretty much as Melody says happens stateside.
I doubt there is prohibition of use of phones in the jury pool ‘waiting room’, however I find it distasteful and inappropriate that these pictures were taken/permitted by Swift in that setting and circumstance. AND, yes, their posting of them has the potential to identify other potential jurors and that is also inappropriate and not without potential consequences.
Sixer – having to vote to acquit, despite better instinct inclining towards “guilty”, because the authorities haven’t got their ducks in a row is most galling.
However, beyond reasonable doubt must mean that. Can’t recall who said “We must rather six guilty men go free, than one innocent be wrongly convicted”, or words to that effect. It’s true, however frustrating. You did all you could as right by the duty placed upon you.
@Dippit, that is Blackstone’s Formulation, from William Blackstone.
@Dippit Don’t you think the officers of the court are the ones responsible for thinking out the implications of pictures of jurors getting out there and not Taylor? She’s not some great legal mind and has zero training in this. At that point she’d have no idea of what the case was. It’s up to the officers of the court to emphasize that there shouldn’t be any pictures.
Thanks both for the explanation. Having never done jury duty I wondered what the rules were, and assumed the UK would be stricter .
I agree with Dippit though that I find the use of phones/taking pics inappropriate in the circumstances, even if it was the waiting room.
Luca – I agree, whoever was supervising allowed it. Also that People had info as to why Taylor was excused.
I did jury duty twice. The first time I hung out for the morning and read a book. All the cases settled, so there was no need for a jury in the end. Btw, cellphones were absolutely verboten. No pictures, no conversations, no checking email. You had to put them away.
The second time I was impaneled for the day, and helped acquit a young man of a drunk driving charge. We were not convinced that the prosecutor proved her case, and the evidence consisted entirely of one police officer saying his eyes were red and the car smelled like a bar. I figured anyone driving at 3am might have red eyes, hell I have allergies and my eyes are often red, and his drunk friend in the back seat might account for the bar smell. It wasn’t enough for me.
The jury selection was interesting. There was one woman who desperately wanted to get out of jury duty and got cocky and said “I think everyone is guilty!” The judge was having none of it. I was also amused that my “Cradle of Filth” heavy metal tshirt didn’t faze her one bit.
@Becky, most courtrooms are open to the public, including media, during jury selection and reasons for juror disqualification are public record, easily obtainable.
@Ms Jupitero, I find our judges here have little patience for feeble excuses and annoying attempts to get out. And no, your t-shirt wouldn’t faze her. They see everything. Many of our courthouses have banned cellphones from the building outright. It depends on the presiding judge
Dippit/Lilac/Miss J – definitely galling but also, as you say, an essential cornerstone of a free society. You have to be prepared to acquit the possibly/probably guilty. Whenever I read BTL stuff about popular court cases, I’m always shocked that people want to convict on balance of probabilities, with absolutely no understanding of the potential for abuse of power that puts into the hands of the state.
The reason Taylor was excused would probably be available in an open records request anyway.
It’s pretty much the same here in Australia, Sixer. I’ve been called up for jury duty about 8 times in the last five years. It’s compulsory yo attend here, too, unless you meet at least one of the very narrow criteria for exemption. The first six times I sat in the lounge where potential jurors wait, but was never selected for a panel. Some larger courts might run several cases simultaneously, so there’ll be more than one panel selected. The next time, I made it into the courtroom. In Australia, it’s here that you find out what the trial is about. Mine was for a serious assault, robbery, sexual assault and malicious damage. I was excused because my best friend had told me all about the case a few weeks earlier, as it had happened near our area and she knew one of the main witnesses. I can understand Taylor’s case, because I also told the judge and legal eagles that I was sure I could be objective…
The last time was about a year ago. There were about 70 people in the holding area, and they were choosing two panels. We were there for about four hours, with the court officer apologising for the delay, and explaining that in one matter, the lawyers were conferring with the accused and the other side. In the other matter, there was a delay because the key witness hadn’t fronted. Finally, we were told we could all go home. The first accused had pleaded guilty at the 11th hour, and in the second matter, the key witness had been bashed and was in hospital in a serious condition, so the trial was aborted and slated for another date.
As for phones, tablets etc., we were allowed to use ours in the holding area, as there’s nothing to see or hear regarding any matters due to be heard.
I thought I’d be excluded for a few years, but received a letter last week informing me that I’m again on the roster for selection. At least they provide delicious sandwiches, cakes, biscuits, tea, coffee and newspapers at my local court house…!
Lilacflowers: I was immensely pleased when the judge got shirty with her. She was openly not taking her responsibilities seriously, and that really is not okay.
Sixer: I couldn’t agree more– this is the reason why the verdicts are “guilty” or “not guilty”. There is no verdict of “innocent.” The burden is upon the prosecution to prove guilt, and it is the job of the defense to make sure the prosecution actually does that. If they don’t then the jury MUST find the defendant “not guilty.” It’s not a game, it is not a “technicality.” It’s a system that is designed to prevent horrible abuses of power. I hate it when people refuse to understand this.
You can’t take any electronic devices into a federal courthouse. So no phones, iPads, laptops, iPods, etc. State and local courts can set their own rules. I know this because I get called for jury duty at least once a year. My work with victims rights organizations means I am always the first person dismissed. It’s such a hassle. Can’t they just flag me as “bad jury material” and stop calling me?
I just want to offer as my intelligent contribution that through out this entire comment thread I heard the ‘DUN-DUN!’ from the Law & Order opening credits.
Ha! I hear that almost every night – my daughter is addicted to Law & Order!
Anytime in the past I have requested not to serve I have had to give the date when I will be available. And always get another jury form at that time. This year is the only time I have filled out the form and not had to go in. I’m in a low population area though.
That’s how it is here, too. You have to give the new date at the time you defer. And then you can’t defer again.
We get two deferrals. We have to give a reason why we won’t be able to attend and they decide if it is acceptable, if yes, we get called again within a matter of a few months. My reason was they were assigning me to a courthouse too far from my home and it would take well over 90 minutes to get there at that time of day. They reassigned me to one closer to home.
Federal jury pools work a little differently.
For federal jury pools they send you a badge and a period of two weeks and you have to call the federal courthouse jury pool hotline every few days, enter in the number on your badge and they tell you either come to your assigned courthouse or call back on whatever date. Any excuses are supposed to be submitted and approved by the Friday before your two weeks start.
Although here for county jury duty you also get a number and you call after 6 pm the workday before and jurors 1-x have to show up. If your number is higher than x you are excused for two years but you are entered in the federal jury pool. My mom hasn’t been picked in over a decade and was so jealous when I got my federal jury summons. She didn’t appreciate the joke of never being tried by a jury of your peers because they are twelve people too stupid to get out of jury duty.
I had jury duty last week! Was on a two-day trial. It was kind of cool.
Being called for jury duty is supposed to be random, but I’ve been called 3 times in 12 years. And you can defer your date but, at least in my state, it’s for a set period of time. 3 months I think.
Were you allowed to take selfies while you were waiting to be selected?
We were allowed to use our phones in the holding room, not in the courtroom.
But she could say no picture if she doesn’t want to act as celebrity while waiting I heard a lot of celebrities that report for jury duty there is no picture of them but tabloids reported because some sources told them as the celebs did not want distracted the other jury
Phone use varies by courthouse. Some don’t allow cell phones in the building. Others will allow jurors to have them in the waiting room but they can’t be used once they enter the courtroom and through the trial process.
Lilacflowers, the courthouse in Malden is pretty draconian….
@Ms Jupitero, yes, it most certainly is! The little stores around there have phone holding policies
I was in the selection room for a while a few months back, and never got called, but people were using phones every where. Also, recently former President George W. Bush was called and he let a ton of people take selfies with him. He wasn’t called either, but I honestly think this is kind of cool all around. No matter what you think of her, she isn’t really overly political, and she uses her family hometown city as her legal residence and at least is registered to vote. All good things to me. We should see more celebs doing their civic duty.
Plenty of celebrities have been called for jury duty and didn’t have security or make a production. Taylor didn’t do anything special.
I’m sure they would have extra security in any court if a high profile person was present.
Any time someone enters a courthouse, they’ve got to go through the metal detectors and have their stuff searched, so no one is going to slip a weapon anywhere near Taylor or anyone else.
It’s not necessarily a question of a weapon. There are always security guards in court because things can get crazy the idea that there wouldn’t be extra security for a celebrity is naive.
Why do such high profile celebrities get called for jury duty? I understand they’re citizens like the rest of the nation, but wouldn’t that hinder the trial anyway? Newspapers taking huge interest in it just because there’s a pop star in the jury, people wondering what she voted there, other jury members being bombarded for info on her, and whatever the verdict be, somebody complaining about it and making her personally responsible? Not to mention an alleged criminal knowing who sent him to jail.
You hear about it randomly (I remember a story about Brad Pitt in LA a while back). I don’t think they ever get past the preliminary phase. Probably for the reasons you stated. I do tend to think celebrities can get out of jury duty if they want (especially in LA) because it’s usually a big news item when they’re called in.
Wondering that too, for all the reasons you stated.
It is probably because it would be a weird bar to set. How do decide someone is too high profile and how often do you revisit that decision? It is easier to include them in the lotto and they can either apply for an exemption or go and let the lawyers figure it out. Plus, it encourages others to perform their civic duty.
Celebrities are a) Still people. They’re not excluded because they’re famous. b) It’s random. The names are chosen from voter registration and dmvs.
LA is a very corrupt place, people get away with a lot there because they have a name.
Maybe, but the big difference is size. LA is a lot bigger than Nashville.
Yea, I guess you’re both right.
I deferred jury duty once because I was in college in another state. I had to tell them the date when I would be back in town and I had to give them the info within 30 days (I think) of receiving my summons. So I couldn’t have deferred and said ‘I’ll let you know when it’s a good time’. If Tennessee’s jury rules are like those in my state, and she received the summons in December, she’d have to have rescheduled her jury duty for now well before the Kanye thing happened. But maybe TN has different rules, idk.
She could’ve deferred or rescheduled but since she has a great PR teams she decided show up as she knew it was the day after the VMA and with the hype and denied of her team to tabloids she was not going as she didn’t submitted a video for nomination
She had already done that in December
This. She isn´t doing anything unplanned… 😉
She postponed in Dec. In Davidson County Tennessee, if you defer/postpone you have to give two weeks within the next year that you are available. I appreciate how everyone here wants to make this grand conspiracy theory about Taylor’s timing, but the fact is she probably wasn’t planning on attending the VMAs and knew it back in December and that’s why she gave one of these weeks as an alternative. She knew she was free. She had to have given this week well before the Kim/Kayne flap blew up.
Also, Nashville is a relatively small place but it does have its fair share of celebrities. When one shows up for jury duty (and plenty do) it is news. Al Gore showed up for jury duty. Swift has stalkers. Her having extra security is not ridiculous.
Go find a controversy elsewhere. All news reports here are glowing and every one of the jurors interviewed said she was as nice as she could be.
Wow you’re too logical for this place.
Yeah I second what Luca76 said: you don’t belong here, Kate.
I read Kate’s comment and the two responses and in Gary Oldman’s voice heard “She’s the hero Celebitchy deserves, but not the one it needs right now.” Cheers to you all lol 🙂
I guess I don’t get Taylor fans or the media because I don’t see how this is “good press”. I mean it’s not bad press either, but it shouldn’t even be news. She didn’t do this out of the kindness of her heart, it’s mandated by law. I mean, I’d rather see this then her usual pics to the gym but I’d rather see nothing at all. Give me time to miss your antics, Taylor.
If she really wanted to she could have gotten out of it. Plus lots of people just plain don’t show up and are extremely rarely penalized for it.
Unlike you, Kaiser, seems like I get called for jury duty every 20 minutes. Seriously, I get a summons at least 2-3 times a year. It’s not a huge hassle, mainly because my boss encourages everyone in our office to do our civic duty.
Do you have a very Anglo name? Because I really do believe my Indian name is the reason why I’m not even being called for jury duty.
I’m not the person who commented, but I have similar experiences. I was called 4 times in 8 years (I didn’t have to go one of those times because it was too close to the last time I served), and I do have a pretty Anglo name (ETA I have an Anglo first and last name. My middle name is Asian, but I don’t know if they look at that). But my dad also has a really Anglo name and has only been called once in his life. My mom has an Asian last name and she’s been called twice. So I don’t know how I got such weird luck but I don’t think it’s just the name (although it might be a contributing factor). I haven’t been called at all since I moved though.
I’ve only ever been called (and dismissed) once in my life and my last name, although not a common one in America, is Scottish.
Good for Taylor. Time and again she proves that her heart is in the right place.
I doubt it’s that as much as fear of being held in contempt of court.
It’s unfortunate that most people dread jury duty. After being on a jury that aquitted a man who was needlessly dragged into court by the man who assulted him over a petty matter ( yes, he was sued by his assailant ), I was thankful to play a role in seeing justice served. I see the importance of my responsibility after my experience.
My mom used to get called once or twice a year like clockwork, but only ever made it on to one civil jury – usually she just cooled her heels in the jury room for days. I was called once and got selected for a criminal trial (felony assault) within the first hour I was there – I never even had the chance to open the very large book I brought with me. Given the nature of the case, it was a little daunting, but really interesting to see how the court system actually works.
@Kaye, what are your state and county laws on that? It sounds like you are being called way too frequently. Most states have limits on how frequently someone can be called for jury duty. Here, it is once every four years for the state system – federal jury duty doesn’t count for that. I once was called back a month after I served and all I needed to do was send a copy of my jury service form and I didn’t have to report again for four years.
Calling the same people back repeatedly in short time frames defeats the purpose of a jury pool.
@Kaiser, I have a very whitebread Anglo name, yes.
And lilacflowers, if I actually got chosen to sit on a jury, I’d be exempt for the next six months.
My 180,000 population city sits in two counties; those from my county are called much more frequently than those from the other. My frequency of jury summons, though, is not much different from other folks in my county.
I have a 3rd summons coming up in November (I postponed). If I get put on the jury, it will be my 3rd time.
I actually kind of like it…as long as the trial is no longer than the amount of days covered by my employer. My first trial I had to use a WEEK of VACATION time and I was soooooo pissed!
I have “flipped the jury before” (changed it from 10-2 to 2-10), and that was pretty fun. 🙂
Fun fact: Women used to be able to get out of jury duty just because they were women. Which meant that not only were women facing criminal charges not getting tried before a jury of their peers but women seeking redress on civil issues, such as pensions, public benefits, job discrimination, business dealings, were not getting trials before their peers either and all men juries were deciding women’s issues. The Notorious RBG changed all that.
I heart RGB so much <3
I want to read everything there is to know about her.
Read “Sisters-in-law” by Linda Hirshman. It is a fairly easy read and covers both RBG and Sandra Day O’Connor and their very different paths to the Supremes.
All hail RBG!
Hurrah for RBG!
I don’t understand, why does the blogs and media continue to write about her when they kept on say she is overexposed. . Should they ignore her..and why is this news.
TS and I finally have something in common Jury duty!
Seems everyone was happy to see her and she was really nice.
As I understand it she would have been unable to defer again, so she showed up. Civic duty – no more, no less.
What I find interesting is that those who are obvious paid shills for Taylor were primed and ready to Comment and Up-vote as soon as this broke. That’s the strategic angle she’s played on this.
Also, inappropriate to be allowing/taking selfie in such a setting and such a circumstance.
As to the admission of her involvement in a separate case, I’m going to allow that that information was pertinent to the voir dire; however, such reintroduced coverage of the circumstances surrounding THAT civil suit (and counter suit) has the potential to derail/taint THAT case as still proceeding. Given Swift’s recent issues with high profile dishonesty, it may be in her interests to make THAT civil suit impossible to proceed.
I also find it generally distasteful that there is a woman out there trying to seek justice for being the (alleged) victim of horrendous crimes, yet now it’s all about Taylor Swift, her selfie allowing/taking, and her civil case.
Questions about any pending litigation would have been on the juror questionnaire. She had to divulge it. It was the judge’s decision that she could not be impartial, which is pretty typical. If the judge hadn’t disallowed her, the defense attorney would have moved to strike her.
Yes, I realise and allowed that Lilac, simply find the press surrounding that aspect now somewhat questionable.
In the UK the facility exists to resolve such matters (potential conflicts to impartiaality) ahead of open proceedings. A potential juror may be dismissed for cause (or other reasons) based upon prior written submission. It is unfortunate that such a song and dance is made of her presence at all; far less now the devil in the detail.
It would be close to impossible for her attendance not to have had some coverage, but by creating a certain mood with the allowing of selfies in advance she created an atmosphere inappropriate to setting, circumstance, and purpose.
During my last jury duty stint, the judge gave potential jurors the option of privately stating their reasons for potential conflict. They could walk up to the judge and whisper in his ear. Interesting that Taylor chose to state it out loud for everyone to hear. I don’t know whether the judge always offers this option. My case was similar to the one that Taylor was up for: aggravated sexual assault and rape, aggravated kidnapping. It was heartbreaking to see so many potential jurors explain why they had a conflict. Some chose to state their reasons out loud, but most opted for the private conversation. I ended up serving as backup juror, which meant I was in court for all proceedings but could not deliberate with the other jurors. The miscreant was guilty was charged and justice was served.
@Dippit, here, potential juror conflict with a specific case are resolved the day of jury selection, not before. Prospective jurors in the waiting room usually have no idea what type of cases are on the docket that day and the court officer, not prospective jurors, determines what is appropriate. The court officer could have banned cell phones completely.
Also, you mentioned Taylor’s honesty as an issue in her civil suit. If her attorneys thought there was a problem with her credibility, they could drop her counter suit and would not have to explain why. As far as courts are concerned, Kim’s badly spliced video could never be used to prove or disprove Taylor’s honesty, it could only be used to prove Kim has a heavily edited video.
“but by creating a certain mood with the allowing of selfies in advance she created an atmosphere inappropriate…”
You think that it was Taylor who “allowed” selfies? I think people’s own sense of decorum and court regulations would be the deciding factor in that behavior. It wasn’t as if Taylor whipped out her phone.
I really side-eyed all of those potential jurors, I thought the giddy fawning and rush to post photos was in poor taste if nothing else. I’m sure Taylor was more than happy to oblige though, and it probably never even occurred to her to politely decline or ask they refrain from posting them publicly for a few days. After all, she’s spent her whole adult life having perfect strangers ask for a photo, this day was like any other day for her. I wonder if she’s ever said no and what the circumstances were.
The woman will have her fair day at trial.
Courthouses like must places aren’t serious all the time. How else would people deal with the stress.
No harm in people not even selected yet having a good time.
The selfie taking was in the waiting room before anyone knew what case they were getting. I’d say the poor jurors that are going to be on that case can say they had a nice distraction before having to go through the heavy details of the case. As for paid shills up voting the story. That’s a bit ridiculous she’s a popstar whose been in the headlines a lot lately and has a lot of young fans and this happens the day after the VMAs. Of course it was going to be gossip news.
.
Not a selfie. Look at the picture.
There was another pic with her taking a selfie with someone.
And… I’ve just seen a blog with at least 5 selfies of people taken with Swift at the courthouse, and gifs so there’s a video as well.
For example who is more recognisable than Robert D Jr he got a lot bodyguards TMZ reported that he reported for jury duty there were not pictures just the report and he was not selected at the end because they said he will distract the jury because of his celeb status
There may have been no pictures because different courthouses have different rules about phones and cameras. Some allow. Some don’t. The county courthouse around the corner from my house does not allow anyone to bring a cell phone into the building. At all. Ever. The convenience store across the street has a “cell phone holding policy” posted on the shop window. They charge $5 to hold your phone. Other courthouses don’t restrict camera/phone access at all, except for in the actual courtroom.
If she had refused to take selfies with people, we’d be reading about how “Taylor Swift showed up to jury duty, and was snobby and standoffish.” Sheesh.
TS was sexually assaulted? I had no idea. Who is the radio host incriminated?
Some scumbag DJ groped her at a meet and greet a few years ago. He changed his story multiple times and counter-sued her because his boss fired him for assaulting Swift. One of his gross excuses was that it was actually his boss who canned him that groped Taylor.
I know we are all supposed to believe Taylor is some master manipulator, but if she already deferred one she would have rescheduled before the whole Kimye mess went down. I doubt they would have let her defer twice in a row, so she went. There have been plenty of celebrities that have served or shown up before, so while famous people can often defer they usually end up having to show up eventually. It’s not like she rang up the authorities right after Kimye happened and said “I must serve jury duty this day!” Also, I don’t see how this is “good PR”…..it’s just doing a normal civic duty. Good PR is her long history of giving generous donations to charity and her recent donations to Louisiana.
I do wonder if she’ll go back to Nashville for a bit and regroup. The press has been brutal to her (some of it was definitely deserved tbh) and it would be good for her to go somewhere where she won’t be papped a lot.
She would’ve known well in advance when the VMA’s were
all that means is that she never intended to go to the VMA’s. there is no devious plot about her doing jury duty.
She probably knew she won’t be attending back then in December. She did not submit any videos anyway. So her schedule was clear.
Joanne, I didn’t say there was – she deferred in December so was already selected.
It seems an amazing co-incidence to me however that the morning after the VMA’s (which she has known for a while she wouldn’t attend) she turns up in Nashville for jury duty.
If you defer, you usually get to pick from a range of future dates, that’s what happened when I deferred a few years ago. I doubt the Monday after the VMA’s was entirely a coincidence, but it may have been nothing more sinister than she knew her schedule would be open then. That said, I’m speechless at how well the timing worked out for her, her team was probably giddy with delight that Normal Taylor got to make a perfectly timed appearance. She was even wearing less makeup than the gym trips usually require — look everyone, so normal.
Dara, it shouldn’t be much of a surprise that apparently Taylor’s publicist was at a the courthouse as well.
Becky, that didn’t surprise me at all. Despite the “she’s just like us” narrative, this appearance took planning – they had to know it was going to create a kerfuffle before she even got there. From security arrangements, to the press release the DA’s office issued, someone from her team was helping to coordinate this.
Well, whether she picked the date or not, her private jet can get her to Nashville in under 3 hours so even if she had wanted to go to the VMAs, she could have easily flown to Nashville by the following morning.
Dara, the “she’s just like us” narrative was practically being shoved down our throats. I’ve never seen her look so “natural” as she did in that waiting room.
PR lady was looking for a good spin and got it.
Celebrities. They’re just like us.
Can you imagine the circus that would has been? But I do applaud her for showing up. She didn’t use her name to get out of it.
I’ve received a summons for jury duty twice for my county. The first time, my juror number was too high and I did not have to go. The second time I had to go and sit in a room waiting to be called. They only called one group of people into a court room to be questioned by the attorneys.
I get called to serve almost every year it seems, although I did defer, get called again, and then was dismissed last year. I don’t know why I get called to serve so often because I’m never chosen to be on the jury.
Sometimes it pays to work in insurance. 😉
Always did wonder how it worked with celebrities and jury duty.
If I had become an international snake emoji icon and then at the next major industry event my nemesis made merely a glancing reference to me and no one else even mentioned my name or made fun of me? I would be celebrating with selfies and autographs at jury duty, too. If the VMAs had brutalized Taylor, she still would have shown up to jury duty but would have asked for “privacy.”
When I saw this yesterday I just started laughing because the timing is exquisite. I can see why Kanye is obsessed with her; she is in it to win it. Luck was on her side this time, though. She was preordained to skip the VMAs, stated she wouldn’t attend but didn’t explain exactly why (causing all kinds of conversation about why she wouldn’t) and then just casually shows up to jury duty (the most mundane and unglamorous of duties) the next day with a bundle of positive selfies and glowing reports about how she was so normal and nice to everyone. Now her initial declaration about not attending has been vindicated and she’s gotten positive press to boot.
I learned 2 interesting things from jury duty (during the trial). First, I was amazed at how strong an impression I received about who was lying. All parties were polished and professional and well rehearsed, yet it was completely obvious which side was playacting. Second, one juror was a naturalized citizen from another country and she was TERRIFIED at the responsibility. She wanted to start with verifying that each document submitted in evidence was not a forgery, and she believed we could be arrested years later if it turned we had made the wrong decision. She seemed like a sensible person, but that was how things worked in her country of origin. The whole experience actually gave me a lot more confidence in the jury system, at least as implemented here.
I’ve been registered to vote for 17 years and I’ve never been called for jury duty. That’s rather odd I suppose
I’m just amazed that they allowed the jurors to take selfies and photos! I’m in Massachusetts and I get called for jury duty every three years like clockwork! I just had jury duty in Worcester two weeks ago. It’s a nice, new juror room and they allow you to bring cell phones into the court house and juror room but you’re not supposed to answer your phones or take photos. Guess the rules are more relaxed in Nashville.
Here in the Bay State they will give you a one-time deferral that lasts for up to one year. After that, you have to have a very good reason or you have to report. The first time I got summoned I had only lived here for a year and a half. I hadn’t registered to vote, didn’t own any property and hadn’t even changed over my driver’s license from New York. So I don’t know how they found me. But I reported to the Appellate Court House in downtown Boston and got picked for a murder trial that was on appeal and the judge sequestered us. The trial lasted nearly two weeks. That was quite an experience. Since then, I regularly get called and have gotten picked three more times on very routine cases. I don’t mind serving. On the plus side, Massachusetts has adopted a “one day or one trial” approach to jury duty with most trials concluding in one to three days. The downside is, Massachusetts is very random: they can send you anywhere in the state. Three years ago, I had to drive to Fitchburg, which is about 90 minutes away. Fortunately, I didn’t get chosen.
Tay-Tay is NOT like the rest of us, but she did show up to do her civic duty.
@Evie, not sure what the rules are in your county (they differ) but in Middlesex, you can ask to be moved to a closer courthouse. I was summoned to appear in Framingham when living in Malden and asked to be moved to a closer courthouse and they reassigned me the first time to Cambridge and the second time to Woburn. Nobody should have to drive to Fitchburg.
The one time I got called for jury duty while living in Mass it was to the Woburn courthouse. I worked nearby and we were done by 3. Ended up working before and after my jury duty. Pretty painless experience and I found it interesting.
@Lilacflowers: I’m in Worcester County and three years ago, when I saw that I had been assigned to Fitchburg, I called and tried to get something closer but they only let you move for “hardship” reasons and they said “inconvenience is not considered a hardship.” So unless I was willing to lie and say I had no car or make up some medical condition, it was just easier to get it over and done with, LOL!
Interestingly, while I was sitting in the jury room in Worcester two weeks ago waiting to see if I’d get called for a case a woman showed up — at Noon. That’s four hours later than the 8 am reporting time. She was giving the court clerk a pretty convoluted story which was obvious BS about how she was confused. It turns out, there was an outstanding warrant for her to appear in court because she had ignored a previous summons to Jury Duty back in January up in Fitchburg. So they not only sent her another Jury Duty notice BUT the summons for failure to appear. And I guess Massachusetts will fine you and possibly even send you to jail for failure to respond to the Jury Duty notice. The woman told the court clerk she was unable to drive to Fitchburg to serve as a juror in January because she had a suspended driver’s license for DUI and she could not appear in Fitchburg Court to respond to the failure to appear notice for the same reason. The court clerk told her she was too late to serve that day, gave her another card and told her to come back the following week. And she still has to respond to the outstanding Failure to appear notice. What impressed me about this incident was that 1) Massachusetts will track errant jurors down and prosecute them for failure to respond and appear and 2) It only took them eight months to track this woman down AND they still issued her another Jury Duty summons in addition to sending her a court date for potential prosecution. In New York City and the five boroughs the court systems are so backlogged that it could take years before they catch up to you, LOL!
@Bonzo, I’ve been to Woburn twice now – both times the most painful part was parking in the wrong lot and having to go out and move the car (they switched the allowable lots so I didn’t actually make the same mistake twice.) And they are a bit relaxed about the use of cell phones and devices in the waiting room – probably because it doesn’t even have windows. At one, I was excused for the reasons I described elsewhere on this thread and the other, I was made foreman of the jury on a civil case over a disputed bill. The judge assured me I would be out in plenty of time to pack for my 6 AM flight to Montana the next day. The case, which was otherwise quite boring, became exciting during jury deliberations when, after we had unanimously decided the guy owed the money, one of the jurors started going on about how we now needed to calculate interest and penalties. I pointed out that as the plaintiff had only asked for the contractual amount of money owed, which did not include interest or penalties, we would be going far beyond our jury instructions. Three of the other jurors agreed with me. Two of the others started arguing with her that even if they wanted to charge for interest, we had no idea how much interest to charge, that the amount she wanted to charge was usury, and no way could they assess penalties. The court officer interrupted the discussion, which was getting heated, to tell us we could go outside to a canteen truck for lunch but he needed to speak to that particular juror. When we returned from lunch, he informed us that she had been removed from the panel because they had discovered that she worked for the plaintiff company and failed to disclose it. We all laughed, quickly agreed that there would be no interest or penalties and were out of there by 1.
@Evie, they can do other things to her too if she fails to pay. Like withhold any income tax return due to her. Another thing MA courts can do that most people do not know about (learned this one in law school but have never seen or heard of it done) if they are paneling a jury and run out of prospective jurors in the pool, the clerk can go out onto the street and serve jury summons to people passing by. I periodically remember that and cross the street when walking by some court houses.
No Swifty fan, but sheesh, jury duty is just that. She chose a time to be there. I do too. Nice to have that option. 🙂
She showed up and she obliged her fans there who asked for selfies.
No crime committed.
She could have been a twat and said no. That sure would have gotten more press LOL
As someone from the UK who has never been called for jury duty, (despite the fact that in a few years I will be too old!) I am surprised at the article and the comments some of you have made. I know very few people who have been called, and nobody who has been called twice. I am amazed that people were allowed to take any kind of photo of other jurors and that you can be expected to travel so far in the States. I don’t think (stand to be corrected) that either/both sides of the case are allowed to object to possible jurors as much as they are in the States.
Here in the states, people who like to object to stuff are often encouraged to become lawyers.
Sometimes they go on to become politicians.
I haven’t been called for jury duty yet but I did receive a juror questonnaire in the mail with yes or no questions to see if I qualified as a juror. Then I got a weird follow up asking about any of my “convictions.” I am pretty sure I answered “no” on the questionnaire I received about prior convictions so I basically wrote “I’ve never been convicted, not sure why I received this.” But I expect to be selected in the near future.
I’ve never heard of “pre-qualification questionnaires”. Did they ask for sensitive personal info – social security number, birthdate, etc, in addition to the yes/no questions?
Usually not SSN although they usually have that. Age, maybe but not birthdate. Occupation. Whether you have been involved in litigation before. I was disqualified from one jury because I was mugged once. Another time, I was called to the bench by the judge and told the attorneys were going to disqualify me for that reason but he wanted them to wait until the panel was chosen and for me to sit there with the others because he had already disqualified a lot and the remaining people seemed nervous about the dwindling pool, and that as a lawyer and officer of the court, he thought I would understand. They were really nice about it.
I filled one out on the day, at the courthouse, and the attorneys based their voir dire questions on how we answered – but I’ve never heard of a questionnaire being mailed in advance. As an aside, I was surprised at how easily people volunteered really personal stories in an open courtroom during the selection process. Some of their experiences were heart-wrenching.
Here in Oz (like the UK), we have a system without voir dire, so these stories are fascinating.
Down here, the lawyers can’t ask the jurors any questions unless they can show a prima facie case that the juror is biased. Since at that stage all they have is your name and your appearance, it’s basically impossible for them to make a case that you’d be biased.
The main argument is that it protects the privacy of jurors – no sensitive questions. One of the side-benefits is that jury selection takes less than 30 minutes.
The downside is that you can easily end up with a biased jury. The ideal here aims more towards a “representative” jury than an impartial one. If 30% of the population have been victims of sexual assault (*number up out of thin air) and you end up with a jury that matches that stat, then it’s probably biased, but representative. If you end up with a jury of 80% survivors, that’s biased and unrepresentative … well, that sucks for the accused, but it’s the luck of the draw.
During voir dire, they can also ask you to disclose whether you speak or understand another language. With the number of cases in Los Angeles County involving defendants and witnesses whose testimony needs to be translated, I saw many jurors dismissed because of concerns that they might interpret testimony or overhear conversations and comments instead of being able to accept and weigh only what was given into evidence as translated.
Lord knows I love me a side-parting, but Taylor looks like she’s got a combover.
That’s all I got on this story!
I always feel that way about her hair. Like she is parting it on the wrong side so it puffs like that. Weird.
I think we’re used to celebrities not having bad hair days because they have a stylist on call 24/7. Clearly she doesn’t. This is refreshing. She’s probably growing it out and we peasants know this can be frustrating.
She didn’t get to pick the date she was told to report. Not even judges (yes judges) or lawyers or politicians get to pick their rescheduled date. Just her lucky day….
I deferred when I had jury duty (same as Taylor), and I got to pick my new report date from a list of dates. It’s pretty routine actually. No blind luck involved here, just better-than-usual timing.
My mom has a very ethnic name and she’s been called for jury duty twice !
You are picked for jury duty at random. I thought everyone knew this.
You don’t have to be registered to vote anymore, at least not in Wa. Or central Wa in particular.
BH was called up 6 times in 4 years. I was called up twice in 19. The first time I was deferred because of the shortage of nurses where I worked. I wasn’t called up again for 7 years. I was no longer working so I went and was chosen. Was there total of about 8 hrs.
Point is, she showed up. She could have asked for special treatment and she didn’t.
To be so wealthy and popular and still be down to earth enough to do this says a lot about her character, IMO.