top of page
  • margaretfmadigan

I'd Only Trust My Ass to a Professional

Trust my big Irish ass when  I tell you that this blog is not going to be about the Zimmerman trial.  Or the verdict of the Zimmerman trial.  I may make reference to it, but it’s not about that.

I don’t know about you, but the last thing I fucking want if I get in trouble with the law is to be tried by a “jury of my peers”.   Maybe back in the 8th Century when juries first came about, it was probably a fair way to do things.  General consensus and all that.  One sheep herder judging another.  Charlemagne was even havin’ juries interrogatin’ and shiz!

But in today’s society, trials have become much more sophisticated and rather than weighing out the evidence, it seems like trials are about nitpicking the law until you find a loophole.  So in that case, I want some damn professionals that know the law deciding my fate, not Betty the Wal-Mart greeter who dropped out of school in the 9th grade and thinks Elvis is still alive.  (or Tupac, you know whatever)

Well, I guess if I know I did it but I won’t admit it but the evidence is overwhelming, yea I’d want that Joe Schmo jury.  But ya’ know what it reminds me of, this current state of criminal trials…  the old Monty Phython sketch, “Confuse a Cat”…  (the last minute or two of the video is what some trials look like)

It just seems that if you thrown enough shit against the wall to confuse the jury and see what sticks is what they’ll come up with. Remember the Bill Clinton trial and “It depends on what the definition of “is” is”?  Why not have a jury of attorneys or something?  Or political science professors?  Or at the very least someone who has seen a few episodes of Judge Judy?

Which brings me to another point, sure it was a jury of George Zimmerman’s peers, but where were Trayvon Martin’s peers?  You had five white women and one “black or hispanic” woman.  Is that even legal, where were the dudes?  Do the victim’s peers not matter?  That only seems fair.  That seemed more like a knitting circle than a jury.  And why only 6?  I thought juries were 12?  Oh that’s right because it’s a Florida thing.  One of six states that believe that less is more.  Who needs 12 when 6 will do?

I’d almost prefer a bench trial, that way you get one educated opinion.  I know, I know you have bad crooked prejudice judges as well but at least they know the law… and they won’t be preoccupied with hitting pay dirt when the high profile trial is over by getting a book deal.  Just sayin’…

Just for kicks, a few examples of concepts just as effective as a “Jury of Peers”…

1.  A Jury of Deers.  They know just about as much…

2.  A Jury of Queers.  This is the term kids are using now when they don’t want to identify either gay or straight… see they aren’t sure either.

3.  A Jury of Mirrors.  You gotta’ look at yourself in the mirror and face the truth.

4.  A Jury of Steers.  Same as deer but have that whole speedy trial thing down.

5.  A Jury of Beers.  Same chance at level of intelligence as Betty.

6.  A Jury of Fears.  I think that was the jury that tried Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. (look it up)

7.  A Jury of Sears.  Well, it is where America shops.

Don’t forget to tip your wait staff…

1 view0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Swimming and Squirming with Scott Spezzano

Podcast episode featuring legendary ROC radio icon and longtime friend Scott Spezzano joins the show to talk about his life on the air, sperm samples and coconuts. #funny #babies #onlyfans #radio #hum


bottom of page