what I learned during 5 days as a juror in state court

I wasn't sequestered but the gag order involved in being on a trial jury has that reverse psychological effect- I know I cannot talk about this trial and yet IT IS ALL I WANT TO DO. Now that it's over, I feel the need to post about my first (and hopefully thanks to the state department last-for-a-long-time) experience with our legal system as a juror (or otherwise for that matter).

I knew from the initial jury selection questions that I would be on this jury. I had little-to-no knowledge of heart catheterizations, no medical background and little bias against "frivolous lawsuits" (yep, they had the gall to ask us that). Boy, how things have changed in a week.

The trial I was on in the Fulton County State Court was a medical malpractice/wrongful death suit. The surviving family members and the estate were seeking 2.4 million in compensation. We heard from 3 heart cath lab techs, 4 cardiologists and several family members of the deceased over the course of 3 days. In the end, we ruled for the hospital and found no evidence that the technicians did not meet the standard of care or that there was any causation. Here are the lessons I learned:

1. It is hard not to respect and despise trial lawyers at the same time. They are gifted story tellers, required to ask the right questions and spin the answers to tell the story of their side of the case. I marveled at the questions they asked, restatements of answers they made and just the sheer persuasion involved in their craft. They definitely work hard and are brilliant people (at least these 2 lawyers were- the judge confirmed that after the trial). It infuriated me a couple times when one side would attack a witness' testimony that I found credible. Sometimes it seemed like there were low blows, but those antics did not win me over- if anything it discredited what they presented.

2. Expert witnesses make a lot of money for not too much work. 3 of the 4 cardiologists on the case were paid altogether about $35,000 to review the case and then give their opinion- about 15 hours of their time each. Now if only I knew a lot about cardiology or some other specialty... On the other hand, I'm not sure I would want to testify and be badgered by lawyers even for that much money.

3. The jury system, while NOT EFFICIENT, is quite fair. I know as Americans we value efficiency to an nth degree but when justice is at stake, I can say I am glad that we employ the jury system and I think it gives fair outcomes. I am glad I experienced this aspect of the legal system first hand, but I do hope I don't have to serve again soon for a very long time.

4. Paying attention to your health is worthwhile! This woman was 47 and suffered from diabetes and extensive heart disease. Even if she survived this event, she had a 3-5 year life expectancy. Understanding more about how our hearts work was great motivation to continue healthy habits.