43
Judge finds 7 prospective jurors in contempt of court
An arrest warrant will be issued for one person who failed to show for the hearing.
YOUNGSTOWN — Judge Elizabeth Kobly of Youngstown Municipal Court is emphasizing the importance and privilege of jury duty — and using contempt charges and fines to make sure the message is understood.
One by one, prospective jurors who failed to report for jury duty the week of April 13 appeared before the judge explaining why they did not make it to court. Each of those appearing was found in contempt of court and issued a $50 fine.
There were eight prospective jurors scheduled to appear before the judge Monday, but one person again failed to show. Judge Kobly said an arrest warrant will be issued for that individual.
The judge said a pool of eligible jurors is selected at the county level with municipal-court judges picking those from the city. Those people selected receive a summons and questionnaire in the mail.
The questionnaire is to be filled out and returned to the court. The prospective juror is then required to call a number at the court to see when he or she will be needed.
Judge Kobly said the only truly acceptable excuse for not showing up for jury duty, or at least asking to be excused, is death or hospitalization.
But she said she has heard a list of excuses including cars that would not start, prospective jurors who simply forgot about the proceedings and prospective jurors who had to be elsewhere.
She started the contempt-of-court proceedings with a lecture about civic responsibility.
“It makes me very sad to have these hearings. We should not be here for this. We have the fairest system in the whole world because our guilt or innocence is determined by us. People in other countries would give their right arm to have this opportunity,” the judge said.
Delia, or juror No. 2, told the judge she is a convicted felon and therefore thought she was automatically excused from the proceedings. Sherry, juror No. 1, said she called the number provided by the court only once and therefore did not know she was scheduled to appear.
Shelia, juror No. 3, said she only read part of the letter from the court and thought she was excused from serving. The bottom two paragraphs informed her to call the court daily in order to learn what day to appear.
“I honestly thought I was done until the bailiff knocked on my door. I would love to be on a jury,” she added.
Several of those involved in the contempt hearings said they have served on jury duty in the past. Those individuals said the call-in system is what led to their confusion.
Ardalia, juror No. 4, said she has served on a jury three times in the last 15 years, but the answering service left her somewhat confused on when to show up in court.
“It’s not like I was trying to get out of it. I have served before. It was just an honest mistake,” she added.
Debra, juror No. 6, said she also has served in the past but had to be at work in place of her boss and could not make the proceedings. She said she called, but it was after the week had ended.
“If you have a lot going on in your mind, you still have to call them every day, and sometimes you just forget. It’s not a good system,” she said.
Judge Kobly said maybe the call-in system should be removed, but she said the system is in place so prospective jurors can call to learn when they are needed. Without the system, she said, jurors would have to appear in court each day of the week and wait, regardless of whether they are needed.
The seven prospective jurors is the third group she has had brought in on contempt-of-court charges — something she does not want to do again.
“This has become a problem, and if it’s a problem for us then it is a problem for the other courts. This is not something I enjoy doing. These hearings are a poor statement on our society, for people to ignore these obligations. It has just gotten to a point where we just can’t ignore it anymore,” she said.
jgoodwin@vindy.com