MASSON: Juries carry out noble, weighty duty

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

MassonWe ask juries to do a lot in Indiana.

In simple terms, juries are a body empaneled to be fact finders as part of the judicial process for resolving criminal charges or civil disputes.

Hobbes described the lot of man in the “State of Nature” as “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” It is the War of All against All. In such a state, there are no rights—at least none that are enforceable. One does not have property, merely stuff he or she is strong enough to hold for the time being. One does not have life or liberty, merely the strength to fight off aggressors for the time being.

Hobbes saw the fix for this as being the Leviathan, a predator strong enough to clear away all the lesser predators that made life intolerable in the State of Nature. The Leviathan was the king.

Certainly, the king might be capricious and act in a manner ruinous to a certain number of subjects. But, overall, this was a net gain compared to the alternative.

We have done away with the king but still wish to keep the predators at bay. The jury plays a role in this process.

The Indiana Constitution takes a strong stand on juries. Article 1, Section 19, says, “In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts.” Section 20 says, “In all civil cases, the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate.”

And, for the princely sum of, perhaps, $15-$25 per day, jurors are called upon to decide whether a defendant is entitled to keep his stuff or maintain his liberty.

What’s more, they are asked to do so with limited information. Frequently enough, jurors are asked to sift through scientific evidence presented by experts or pseudoscience presented by charlatans on subjects far beyond their ken, under a limited time frame.

Once the case is given to the jury, jurors are, essentially, confined to a room until they make a decision, forbidden to do outside research.

Despite its integral role in preserving our rights, performed under less-than-ideal circumstances, the jury is not typically held in high regard. Certainly the position is not much sought after.

There is the old joke about not wanting to be judged by a group of people not smart enough to get out of jury duty. Judges, to their credit, take a dim view of citizens attempting to shirk their civic duty.

Verdicts certainly can be unreasonable. But, sometimes we set the body up for failure.

If you empanel a group of jurors with uncertain math skills, show them the sticker price of medical bills without letting them know what was actually paid, allow the testimony of a paid (but credentialed) professional spouting unreliable statistics, then tell the jurors to put a value on “pain and suffering,” you are bound to get some unsatisfactory results.

Still and all, our juries are usually composed of Hoosiers attempting to do their level best. People forgoing income, leisure and family time to do their civic duty.

Lawmakers and judges should look for ways to remove structural impediments in order to enhance just outcomes. I would suggest, among other things, better screening of “experts” and perhaps a review of the math jurors use to arrive at a damage amount.

We have come a long way from the predations of kings and highwaymen, but there is certainly room for improvement.•


Masson is a Lafayette attorney, author of Masson’s Blog and former counsel for the Legislative Services Agency. Send comments on this column to ibjedit@ibj.com.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Socialized medicine works great for white people in Scandanavia. It works well in Costa Rica for a population that is partly white and partly mestizo. I don't really see Obamacare as something aimed against whites. I think that is a Republican canard designed to elicit support from white people for republican candidates who don't care about them any more than democrats care about the non-whites they pander to with their phony maneuvers. But what is different between Costa Rica nd the Scandanavian nations on one hand and the US on the other? SIZE. Maybe the US is just too damn big. Maybe it just needs to be divided into smaller self governing pieces like when the old Holy Roman Empire was dismantled. Maybe we are always trying the same set of solutions for different kinds of people as if we were all the same. Oh-- I know-- that is liberal dogma, that we are all the same. Which is the most idiotic American notion going right back to the propaganda of 1776. All men are different and their differences are myriad and that which is different is not equal. The state which pretends men are all the same is going to force men to be the same. That is what America does here, that is what we do in our stupid overseas wars, that is how we destroy true diversity and true difference, and we are all as different groups of folks, feeling the pains of how capitalism is grinding us down into equally insignificant proletarian microconsumers with no other identity whether we like it or not. And the Marxists had this much right about the War of Independence: it was fundamentally a war of capitalist against feudal systems. America has been about big money since day one and whatever gets in the way is crushed. Health care is just another market and Obamacare, to the extent that it Rationalizes and makes more uniform a market which should actually be really different in nature and delivery from place to place-- well that will serve the interests of the biggest capitalist stakeholders in health care which is not Walmart for Gosh Sakes it is the INSURANCE INDUSTRY. CUI BONO Obamacare? The insurance industry. So republicans drop the delusion pro capitalist scales from your eyes this has almost nothing to do with race or "socialism" it has to do mostly with what the INSURANCE INDUSTRY wants to have happen in order to make their lives and profits easier.

  2. Read the article - the reason they can't justify staying is they have too many medicare/medicaid patients and the re-imbursements for transporting these patient is so low.

  3. I would not vote for Bayh if he did run. I also wouldn't vote for Pence. My guess is that Bayh does not have the stomach to oppose persons on the far left or far right. Also, outside of capitalizing on his time as U. S. Senator (and his wife's time as a board member to several companies) I don't know if he is willing to fight for anything. If people who claim to be in the middle walk away from fights with the right and left wing, what are we left with? Extremes. It's probably best for Bayh if he does not have the stomach for the fight but the result is no middle ground.

  4. JK - I meant that the results don't ring true. I also questioned the 10-year-old study because so much in the "health care system" has changed since the study was made. Moreover, it was hard to get to any overall conclusion or observation with the article. But....don't be defensive given my comments; I still think you do the best job of any journalist in the area shedding light and insight on important health care issues.

  5. Probably a good idea he doesn't run. I for one do not want someone who lives in VIRGINIA to be the governor. He gave it some thought, but he likes Virginia too much. What a name I cannot say on this site! The way these people think and operate amuses me.