Monday, December 10, 2012

Jury Duty in US District Court – An Interesting Experience

(on right) Carl B. Stokes United States Courthouse, Cleveland Ohio

I recently had the privilege of being selected for jury duty for the United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio in Cleveland. It was a very interesting experience. Everyone should have the chance to be called for jury duty, if anything to see firsthand how the American system of justice works in reality – and not how it works on a television show.


A few months ago, it was with a slight sense of dread as I opened a piece of mail from the US District Court in Cleveland. It was just a simple survey to verify my qualifications as a potential juror but I knew exactly what it meant – I would soon be called for jury duty. The survey merely attempts to flush out those situations that would likely exclude people – disabilities, military duty, advanced age, etc. I didn’t fit in any of those categories so I knew it was just a matter of time before I was called.

Sure enough, less than a month later came the notice that I was selected to serve. Every night, beginning on a set date, I was to call the court and hear a recording stating whether my jury group was to report or not. As the term of service is one month or one trial, I had to clear my schedule for a 30 day period…a bit of a hassle as I’d already made plans for the time before the Thanksgiving holiday.

The first night I called, I was informed the trial to which I had been assigned had been moved – so I was able to change my schedule back. Within about a week, the trial date was moved again. But that date stuck, and I reported for duty on the date and time required,

The US District Court in Cleveland is located in downtown Cleveland next to the Tower City complex, and the enclosed walkway from Tower City makes it easy to get to the courthouse. The Carl B. Stokes United States Courthouse is only about 10 years old and the design is contemporary and serene, yet conveys serious business.


Jurors were directed to the very large jury assembly room and were asked to complete a questionnaire. (While some jurors seemed to think that sitting in the back of this large room would mean they would likely not be in the first group selected,  this makes no difference.) Having served on a jury for my hometown once before, I knew that the questions asked on the survey were not random but related to the case in some way. Of course, each question was answered honestly.

And then…the waiting. While jurors were asked to report by 7:30, we weren’t moved to the courtroom until about 3 hours later. The names of potential jurors were called and assigned a juror number, and the group moved to the hallway outside the courtroom, which was several stories up. (The view of the Cleveland skyline and the Terminal Tower can’t be beat!) We were lined up according to the number we were assigned (I had a very low number so I thought I would surely be seated as a juror) and we were led into the courtroom and seated according to the number assigned. Some jurors numbering in the 30s-40s were breathing a sigh of relief thinking they wouldn’t be seated as a juror (they were wrong).

The process of voir dire begins, which is the process where prospective jurors are questioned about their backgrounds, potential biases, and in some cases the answers on the questionnaire, before being selected to sit on the jury. The phrase voir dire is derived from Latin and French and means "that which is true"; but I say it means “very boring.” When I served on a city jury, voir dire was quick and took only about 15 minutes, but as this case was in a Federal court, the process is far more time consuming and the questioning far more detailed. In this particular case, potential jurors are first asked questions as a group, and then asked questions individually (yet still in a group setting), verifying some basic information, such as name, occupation, etc.  The process stretched for hours as some jurors (in this case, at least 30 jurors) were called to the bench to be asked specific questions based on how the potential juror answered the questionnaire. While the judge, the prosecutor and/or defense attorney asks the potential juror questions, a “white noise” –  like the static heard over an old analog TV with no signal – is heard, which masks what is said at the bench to others in the courtroom (and vice versa). At first it was not an unpleasant sound, but after this went off and on for hours, it became rather annoying. (By the way, the next day my ears were ringing loudly for hours…was it a rebound from all that white noise?)

I was called up to the bench and asked several questions and answered them honestly. Jurors are not told whether they are being selected or disqualified until the attorneys have screened each juror for which they had specific issues with the questionnaire.

Hours later – it was close to 5PM now – the jurors were selected. After going through aver 40 jurors, the court finally picked twelve jurors and a few alternates. I was not selected, and while they don’t explain why, I suspect that due to the nature of the case and some of my answers relating to the questionnaire (which was completed before we were told the charges against the defendant) likely disqualified me. Some of the potential jurors who thought they had high enough numbers that they would not get selected got quite the surprise when they were picked.

The judge in this case was Chief Judge Solomon Oliver, Jr., and he did a great job in conducting the entire process. He seemed very sensitive to the fact that the process took quite a bit of time and the potential jurors were an impatient lot.

I don’t know the outcome of the case – it may still be going on as the case was projected to run 4-6 days. I believe that the process, while time consuming, did its best to get a fair and impartial jury.

Even though it was a bit of an inconvenience, I would be happy to do it again, including being seated on the jury. It’s part of the American legal system that everyone should experience  - better as a juror than as a defendant!.



All Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Social Security is NOT “Entitlement”


Nothing gets me more agitated than when someone in the media or in Congress refers to Social Security as an entitlement program, as if retiring Americans expect a pay out for doing nothing. As we near the “fiscal cliff” and our government representatives work to keep us from going over the edge, the focus is turning to raising taxes and cutting “entitlements” and Social Security always comes up on that list.

What the media and Congress fails to remember is that Social Security is a program to which Americans pay in while they work. I’ve paid in to social security for over 30 years – many of those years I paid up to the maximum – and I wasn’t given a choice whether I wanted the government to take my hard earned money. Make no mistake, I never expected that Social Security would be my only retirement investment; I’ve built up a 401k account for most of my years worked. But, I never looked at Social Security as something I was entitled to for doing nothing; I looked at it as a promise that the government made to me as it took thousands upon thousands of dollars out of my paycheck each and every year for decades. I don’t look at social security as a charity program: I looked at it as an investment into my future and to the stability of all Americans who worked hard all their lives and don’t want to be destitute in their retirement years.

Is it the fault of Americans who paid in to the program in good faith that the government either mismanaged the money or didn’t make the proper adjustments over the years to keep the program fully funded? No. I wonder to where all this money has gone to over the years and would love to see an full accounting of how all the money is spent or invested.

And why is it that when our government representatives talk about cutting Social Security benefits or changing the program, there is no discussion or focus on GOVERNMENT pensions for government employees? I guarantee that if government pensions were referred to as entitlements, the outrage would be even greater. I am of the opinion that any changes to Social Security must include similar changes to the government paid pensions of ALL current and former US government employees.

It’s also annoying when members of Congress use the excuse that we can’t allow the burden of funding Social Security to be passed along to our children and grandchildren. Considering that my decades of paying in to the program supported my parents and grandparents, I don’t see a problem in younger workers paying in – as I did – to support retirees. There were no government representatives who were worried about the burden that paying in to the program made on baby boomers when they entered the workforce many years ago.

I am not saying there should never be changes to the program. Clearly, workers – both for private sector and government jobs – need to take responsibility for saving for future retirement. I can also understand that the baby boomers moving into retirement age represents a strain on the program. But I find it insulting that our government representatives to refer to Social Security as “entitlement” as if retirees are getting something for doing nothing. This is far from the case. The government “borrowed” that money from workers and as far as I am concerned, they have an obligation to make good on repaying that debt. As the fiscal cliff looms, the worst economic thing that can happen is for the government to throw off the retirees who paid into the program for decades. There are real entitlement programs out there (such as lengthy unemployment benefits) that need to go first.




All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Seeing True Colors Through Politics


The 2012 presidential election helped to show me the true colors of many people. I’m not talking about the Democratic blue and Republican red colors.  This election exposed some of the worst traits – the true colors - of some people, and many of those people were even family and friends.

I was saddened to see how many of my so called “friends” - in their attempt to support Mitt Romney - posted photos and/or links to other sites that promoted intolerance and racism. I suppose they thought that by continuing to promote their candidate by repeated low blows to the current president that somehow I would come over to their way of thinking. (I didn’t.) Many of those same “friends” forwarded bigoted emails, thinking that because they forwarded content that someone else wrote that I would never expect those bigoted thoughts to come from them. (They were mistaken.) Some forwarded emails filled with accusations about the Obama administration that simply were not fact checked beforehand (I checked.) Of course, when I would reply back giving them links to the facts to counter their claims, I’d either be ignored or sent a reply that said something like “Oh, I was just forwarding it to you as I thought you’d get a laugh.”

Who is laughing now?

What some of these “friends” fail to understand is that their barrage of negativity only worked against their candidate. Granted, the Romney campaign likely never sanctioned any of these emails or political messages that were seemingly sent by supporters on his behalf. I’ve been voting since 1973 and I’ve gone between voting Republican and Democrat many times; I tend to vote for a person rather than a party, But the increasing vitriol from my Republican “friends” that began as far back as the 2008 election has confirmed that the Republican Party ideals aren't even remotely close to mine. Sadly for them, I don’t see them getting there any time soon, at least not without the party jettisoning any Tea Party affiliation or without showing some respect for minorities, for women, or for the “47%”.

Congratulations to President Barack Obama on his re-elections. I can’t help being happy – and energized - about it. The fact that he has been given a second term tells me that we have a good chance of moving…”Forward.”




All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted
Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.


Monday, October 8, 2012

My Endorsement of Barack Obama Via “Why Obama Now”

This animated video short, created by Simpsons / Family Guy animator Lucas Gray and using a speech delivered by President Obama at the Associated Press Luncheon in April of 2012, best represents one of the many reasons why I am endorsing Barack Obama for another term as President of the United States. It’s also the best explanation of the failures of the "trickle-down economics" concept that I’ve ever seen.








All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.




Thursday, September 20, 2012

There Are No Mulligans in Politics (A Cautionary Tale)

Mitt Romney’s bid for the White House took a turn for the worse this week, much like a golf shot that hooks into the woods out of sight. My guess is Romney wishes that politics would have the golf equivalent of a mulligan – a “do over” – but he has learned the hard way that once words come out of one’s mouth and are either heard by others, or worse yet RECORDED by others, they are impossible to take back. One would think he should have already learned this by now, but there we go thinking again.


A video of Romney secretly recorded at a fundraiser with wealthy donors recently went public. It didn’t take long for the information to blanket the Internet, TV, and print media. In this video, Romney took the stance that the bottom 47 percent of Americans are a bunch of useless, entitled people who see themselves as victims, and that he really can’t worry about them because people like that will vote for Obama no matter what. One can argue that Romney never expected someone to record his words at a private event. If he really expected his words would never be repeated, he was being either incredibly stupid or incredibly naïve (either trait is not good for a president). Americans should be thankful that Romney’s speech was exposed as now people can really see how he feels about 47 percent of the population.

Of course, this Romney flub is fodder for the Obama campaign and related backers, and I can’t say I blame them for jumping it quickly and getting TV ads out there that use the recordings. Yes, it’s rough here in Ohio being blasted with nasty ads from all sides, but I must admit that this time, I’m enjoying them. Two of the latest ads on this issue are below – sorry, no mulligans for Mitt.







All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

Friday, September 14, 2012

Be Sure to Vote – Be Sure You're Registered!

The political season is bringing out the usual vitriol and it’s becoming really tiring. In fact, I’ve stayed away from jumping into the fray with my usual commentary as the media is already flooded with polarizing commentary. It’s been really bad here in in the battleground state of Ohio, where the uncalled for pummeling of Senator Sherrod Brown by the PACs began over a year ago. Enough already!

The most important message that I can relay regarding the 2012 presidential election is to make sure that every person of voting age gets out and votes. One may think a single vote doesn’t count, but those single votes add up. Just as important as actually voting, voters should be sure that they are registered long before they get to the polls. The time to do that is NOW before the voter registration cut off (check your local voter registration bureau).

Get out and vote - it does make a difference!



All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information, The Frequent Critic, here.




Wednesday, August 22, 2012

SiriusXM: Worst Customer Service EVER


SiriusXM has a great product. I got a 6 months free trial with my new car purchased in late 2010 and grew to love all the great music channels. I especially loved being able to hear music without the annoying barrage of commercials on “free” radio. My husband got a new car several months ago and also got the trial package and he loves the product too. We also have access on our computer.

The problem with SiriusXM, though, is that their customer service is the worst I have ever experienced. I used to think that because I spent almost 30 years in the field of customer service – 20 of those years in middle and upper management – that I was overly sensitive to customer service failures. But SiriusXM has proved to me time and time again that the problem is clearly theirs.

Anytime I have renewed or modified/added on to my SiriusXM service, SiriusXM screwed it up. That’s problem #1. Problem #2 is that their customer service people can only be described as incompetent. I just spend over 30 minutes on the phone with one who seemed incapable of understanding my problem, and then was completely incapable of resolving it. In fact, when he was unable to find the transaction I initiated a week before with another SiriusXM agent, he told me he was worried that my credit card had been compromised and told me to immediately contact my bank and credit card company. Nothing like having a clueless customer service rep warn you that the previous rep you spoke to may have been dishonest!

I contacted my bank who could clearly see a tiny pending transaction from SiriusXM which they felt was likely put through to verify the card. Why SiriusXM could not see this transaction or my order is beyond me. When I called SiriusXM back – I got a new customer service rep, of course – they seemed to start the whole thing over by NOT listening to my problem and parroting back to me information already on my account. At my wits end, I interrupted the rep and explained my problem, and, when he clearly sensed my growing frustration, immediately said he’d get his supervisor. A few short minutes later, this new agent was able to determine that they did have my order but it would not be processed until the date the trial ended on my husband’s new car. Why the first customer service agent could not see this is beyond me.

One of SiriusXM’s big problem is that it is evident they are outsourcing their customer service to a country – or countries - outside the U.S. and the communication barrier is great. And likely because of this issue, their agents seem to have a scripted manner of handling calls; when the call deviates from the script, the agent becomes confused and stymied in resolving the problem. They clearly have a case of “the right hand doesn’t know what the left is doing” problem, too.

SiriusXM seems unwilling to do anything except provide minimal customer service and they company doesn’t seem to care how much they inconvenience their customers. But they’d better change fast. More people are getting smart phones and other methods of wireless access that allows for more music choices and more ways to get music. When my subscriptions run out, I am going to give a serious look to SiriusXM alternatives. This is that last time I want spend time in the hellish world of SiriusXM customer service!



All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted



Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.