I recently added a summer vacation countdown clock to the website of my kids' school:

I think I'll show it to my kids every now and then.

I just escaped from yet another harrowing near-miss with time in the jury box, having been rejected by two seperate defense attorneys on sight. For this, I am selfishly grateful–I really didn't want to have to delay my departure for vacation due to a week of sitting through a murder trial.

At the same time, I realized there was little chance of me getting past voir dire in any case; I am, after all, a 37-year old white professional male with 17 years of education. In other words, I don't fit the demographics of the typical “favorable” jury member.

The racial demographics of Baltimore have been well-documented. The city's population is roughly 53% African-American, 44% European-caucasian, and the remainder is divided between Asians and a growing population of Central and South American immigrants. But you'd never be able to tell that from sitting in the jury assembly room at the city courthouse.

In Baltimore, the vast majority of defendants are African-American males under the age of 30. And the ideal jurors in the minds of most defense attorneys? 50+ year-old African American women–women with children close to the age of the defendant.

The theory behind this is that these women will be more sympathetic,and their maternal feelings will influence the verdict.

It's an interesting strategy, and a well-tested one. My non-scientific sampling of 8 jury selections–including the one I ended up serving on 6 years ago–found juries almost always have at least 10 women; and at least 80% are African-American. White women selected are usually younger, in their mid- to late twenties. If there are men on the panel, they tend to be younger (no older than 34), and at least one is an African-American.

The reasoning, according to one lawyer I spoke with about this: older African-American men and younger African=American women tend to be much more critical of young black men. The hope is that the middle-aged African American women will feel more sympathy for cultural reasons, that the young white women will be more sympathetic and open to suggestions by the defense.

On the other hand, the prosecution wants a jury with as many white males on it as it can get–regardless of whether they're standing in front of them with a copy of Noam Chomsky's “Understanding Power” in their hands or not. White male juries are hanging juries.

Agilent to restore employees to full pay. CNET Jun 20 2002 12:00PM ET [Moreover - CNET]

CBS MarketWatch's Bambi Francisco asks of CNet: “It's the best-positioned company for what? “

Tom Tomorrow has discovered a new sport: looking for uses of “Minority Report” as a political metaphor.

Don't get on Ashcroft's bad side

Combatants Lack Rights, US Argues (Washinton Post)
An excerpt:
“There is no right under the laws and customs of war for an enemy combatant to meet with counsel concerning his detention, much less to meet with counsel in private, without military authorities present,” the Justice Department wrote. “The court may not second-guess the military's enemy combatant determination. Going beyond that determination would require the courts to enter an area in which they have no competence…[and could] possibly create 'a conflict between judicial and military opinion highly comforting to enemies of the United States,' ” the brief said, citing a 1950 Supreme Court ruling…

“This is really an astounding assertion of authority,” said David Cole, a Georgetown University law professor. “It's not just that you have no right to a lawyer, it's that you have no right to even have a hearing. . . . If that is true, then there is really no limit to the president's power to label U.S. citizens as bad people and then have them held in military custody indefinitely.”