Shit! Provider on My Jury Panel!

I understand all that you wrote and you've got some good points Mazo, but what happens in the hobby should stay in the hobby. Outing her to the judge could come back to hurt her in more ways than one. She could lose her children, freedom, etc. down the road if she ever finds herself in a Texas court room (civil or criminal). Originally Posted by Nicolette Bordeauxva

Sorry Nicolette. I think you must have missed my previous post.

I advocated telling the judge privately that there was a "personal relationship" with the woman, not standing up in court and yelling "she's a whore - burn her!"

I have a lot more respect for providers than that!

I continue to think that quiet disclosure is the only reasonable course here. There's too much risk for all parties involved by just letting the bomb lay there and hoping it doesn't go off.

Cheers,
Mazo.

I advocated telling the judge privately that there was a "personal relationship" with the woman, Originally Posted by Mazomaniac

Wouldn't that be a "professional relationship"?

I agree that the chances of a reversible error here are slim to none, but I don't think that's the issue. The attorney here has an ethical obligation to his client and as an officer of the court. Shackleton is not under any obligation to reveal the precise details of the "personal relationship," and he doesn't need to, but he does need to keep her out of the jury box. If he doesn't ask the judge to strike the juror he is simply running the risk of a much bigger, and potentially far more embarrassing problem, down the road. If the lady is interviewed post trial or discloses the "previous relationship" to a friend and it gets back to the attorney for the other party, then the S could definitely hit the F. If the stakes are high in either a criminal or civil proceeding then opposing counsel may be kicking over rocks post trial seeking grounds for overturning the verdict. Absurd as some of these claims may be, they do come up. And the problem can be avoided without unduly embarrassing either Counselor Shackleton or the lady performing her civic duty.

My $.02.

1. Although YOU might feel she can be impartial, do you have any idea how she really feels about clients? How do you know if whether she secretly hates clients and so YOUR client is screwed? The reason that the courts ask that question and expect it to be answered honestly is because previous contact can and DOES influence people no matter what you may think. Sex, even in the hobby, IS a previous relationship.

2. Would your client be OK if the opposing counsel had been sleeping with a juror and did not disclose it? I doubt it. Pay or not, maybe the other counsel just "happened to be her type" and she balled his (or her) eyes out one night. Influence? You don't know till you ask your client.

3. Our entire system of justice SHOULD rest on honesty. By even having to ask this, I must question your level of ethics and behavior. I want an advocate for my side but I do not want a liar.

4. Are you willing to risk disbarment if she decides after the fact to come forward and talk to the judge? YOUR are the officer of the court and bear a higher burden than a juror when it comes to this issue. YOU know the law and YOU know the consequences of violating your oath to the court. All it would take is a casual comment to another juror, maybe in jest, and your career is gone in flames in the worst case situation.

Always look at the worst case situation and avoid it at all costs.

Summary?

YOU bear the burden for coming forward and being honest since you are an officer of the court.

In my opinion, anyone thinking otherwise must be nuts and and I hope you never face a prosecutor who would lie so easily to convict you.

Well, I don't really know what the right thing to do here but there's a voice in my head saying... ~ Make an appointment with her while she is in court instead of having to make a phone call or sending her an email/pm.~
I like to do business with people face to face, if I can.
But that's just me. :-P

Who's to say that even if she DID remember that she would even CARE? Can't speak for everyone-but personally, myself perfer to be very private, confidential and not attract attention to myself. Seems to me if she acted out badly-that it would draw undesired attention to her. Are there pieces that have been left out, or am I extremely naive? From my personal standpoint I can completely seeing your perspective bc I'm a paranoid "prepare for the worst" kinda gal. But, just speaking on my behalf alone-I could not think of why a provider in that kind of public setting would want to stir shit, or otherwise draw uneeded attention to herself. That would compromise not only hers-but others discretion,etc. Just my .02

A

i'm curious to see how this one turns out. I for one try to stay away from court rooms. Hell, i wake up in a cold sweat thinking about what happens when i finally run into a provider at the supermarket or something with my SO. Originally Posted by sinkerswim

First of all, its not that deep. This is a business, we want to get paid and have fun, not ruin your life. If I saw a hobbyist out in public regardless of who he was with,I would not speak or even exchange eye contact unless initiated. Even then, depending on circumstances, no hablo ingles! The fantasy world that we call "the hobby" is just that. Now on the other hand, women when scorned can be very vindictive. All the more reason to not play games with a provider and be a gentleman when in session. If you shorted her, took advantage, or was otherwise a dick, then you might have something to worry about.

Besides, if she looks just as hot in public as she did in session, there's a possibility you will be back. Sometimes you guys are just as vain as us...

Love the question and comments. Couple months ago I was called to jury duty and selected along with thirty others to head to the next process. Ended up with a very HOT woman sitting next to me without a wedding ring. We chatted and things were looking up.

Then the prosecutor stood up and asked if anyone in the room knew the defendant. Then if anyone knew him, and finally if anyone knew the judge. The lady beside me shyly raised her hand. When called upon and asked how she knew the judge she replied. I have sex with him a couple times a week.

OMG the room went deadly silent. My jaw dropped and looking at her I immediately thought she was a provider. While the prosecutor was trying to pick his jaw up off the floor, the judge just shook his head and replied, "Honey, don't you think you could'a just said we were married?"

Nice lady, and damm if she didn't get excused.

Your Honor, I have no idea. chances are she does not remember you as well as you remembered her. and two years....one time wham bam.... like stated on page one...she was picked because of her fair qualities for judgment. i am sure she does not want the publicity as well.

interested how it turned out and if you spoke to her after the trial was over.....

Don't you get a certain number of pre-emptive exclusions, where you can exclude somebody and don't have to explain?

If you are required to give a reason, just say "Your Honor, Juror #69 looks familiar. We may have met. I don't remember if it was socially or professionally or maybe I just saw her nekkid pictures on the Internet. Or maybe all three."

The real nightmare scenario, though, is that you both stay quiet and she does get on the panel and then she calls you up that night asking how much you're going to pay her to not tell the judge . . . .

Cheers,
Mazo. Originally Posted by Mazomaniac

Do not bump threads that are over 30 days old.
Chipper


I personally think this is going to be the most serious of the issues. I realize by now the situation is over and done. I agree with Mazo, the possibility of blackmail becomes a risk. To protect yourself a vague disclosure of brief personal relationship to the Judge. Her removal is the lesser of the evils.

MasterTrucker. Please do not bump threads over 30 days old. This one is nearly 3 months old. -rak