BEAT BARRATRY / DEMAND A JURY TRIAL Wyvell jailed when she stopped showing up for vexatious attacks, no Fairfax judge willing to dismiss, sanction...

[READER COMMENT] 75 jury trials only might be a sign litigants in Texas are not informed of all options. Juries would certainly correct for the nonsense inherent in litigated divorces. I say to Prof. Meyer the opposite will happen: contested divorces would become LESS expensive, SHORTER & more BUSINESS-LIKE. Juries to correct for chicanery, cronyism, collusion & corruption? Where is the harm? Nine of ten litigants would rather negotiate--all it takes is one unscrupulous lawyer to create a conflict where there is none. I was jailed when I stopped showing up for vexatious attacks, no judge was willing to dismiss & sanction when appropriate. Judges instead seized the $7862 bail my brother posted on my behalf & gave it to the sub-judge/lawyer to pay her churned legal fees--the money my child's father spent in one summer to maliciously prosecute me. A jury would have protected me from such nonsense. ~Veronique Wyvell, RN, McLean, Virginia, wrote on 2/19/2007

New legislation: Divorce juries
If passed, couples would have the option

BY LAURA CAMPER
STATE CAPITOL BUREAU
Saturday, February 3, 2007

Divorcing couples may soon have more options in settling their differences if recently introduced legislation allowing jury trials in divorce proceedings passes.
A divorce is the only place in our judicial system where people don't have that choice, said Rep. Monique Davis, D-Chicago, who introduced the legislation.
"I don't think too many people would request this, but it gives them the option," she said.
Davis introduced the bill after a constituent came to her complaining about what he felt was an unfair divorce trial. He was unhappy because the judge and his ex-wife's lawyer were good friends, but felt he had no options, Davis said. While most judges are fair and honest, human nature being what it is, circumstances can influence their decisions, she said.
"With a jury, you've got other people listening to your story," Davis said. "We just want fairness for all parties concerned."
Texas already allows jury trials in divorces.
Jim Loveless, a family law attorney from Fort Worth and officer of the Council of Family Law Section of the State Bar of Texas, agreed there are times when a jury allows for a more fair trial. Some judges may have certain beliefs about divorce that can affect the outcome, he said. For instance, a judge may believe the mother should have custody of children except in extreme circumstances, or a partner who had an affair may be automatically excluded from having custody.
"When you know a judge will or won't do a certain thing no matter what," Loveless said, "you may make the decision to take some of the power away from that judge."
A jury can also eliminate the "Russian Roulette uncertainty" when the judge is assigned, he said.
"When you're dealing with a jury panel, you're able to ask each juror if they have biases or prejudices," Loveless said.
In Texas, the law allows juries to decide custody arrangements, contested property value or whether property is community or separate. The jury doesn't decide who gets the property or if there are grounds for divorce, Loveless said.
The legislation introduced by Davis is very similar, but it doesn't specifically address whether juries can award property.
Jury trial requests in divorces are rare, with only 75 in Texas in 2005, Loveless said. To put that in perspective, in January 2005 alone, there were 6,862 divorces in Texas, according to a report by the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. However, Loveless is firmly in favor of the jury option.
"I think our Constitution and the constitution of this state gave folks the opportunity to have a group of their peers make ... those decisions impartially," he said.
Some other lawyers disagree.
David Meyer, a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law, said it would be a mistake to introduce jury trials into divorce cases.
"With juries, contested divorces would become more expensive, more drawn-out and more emotional. ... The airing of all these matters before jurors will only aggravate the sense of invasion that already attends many divorces," Meyer said.
Loveless said he hadn't found that to be true. During a jury trial, the judge will limit the information allowed in the courtroom to what is admissible, he said.
"They're not going to let you put in too much that is inflammatory. Whereas if it's just a judge hearing it in a bench trial, they'll usually let a lot more stuff in," Loveless said.
As for the added expense, Loveless noted that he has dealt with divvying up billions of dollars of assets. If the couple wants to spend the extra money on a jury trial, that should be their choice, he said.
Springfield attorney Howard Feldman opposes the legislation. Divorces are emotional, complicated processes affecting not only the couple but also their children, he said.
"Juries deciding what is in the best interest of children? I can't imagine anything more inappropriate," Feldman said, adding that custody cases should be decided on fact not emotions.
Associate Sangamon County Judge Steven Nardulli said custody should not be tried before juries.
"(The case) would be tried in front of people who, while they had very good motives, are simply not equipped to deal with the kinds of child-related issues that come before a judge," Nardulli said. The same problems would not be inherent in property disputes, he said.
Retired Sangamon County Judge Stuart Shiffman echoed the same concerns.
"A jury trial is a selling process. (Lawyers) are trying to manipulate the juries even from the selection process," Shiffman said. "I think it would be extremely damaging to everyone."
Although closed-circuit television and taped interviews could be used for children, Shiffman wondered if parents seeking an advantage would allow their children to testify that way.
Safeties are built into Illinois' family law judicial system as it stands, Shiffman said. For instance, divorcing couples are allowed one chance to ask for a change of judge for any reason before a case has started, he said.

Contact Laura Camper at:
laura.camper@sj-r.com or 782-6882.

This story can be found at:
http://www.peskindlaw.com/DrawNews.aspx

... trial by jury is preferable to any other, and ought to be held sacred ... -Constitution of Virginia, Article I, Section 11

Veronique Wyvell, RN
Member, Fairfax County Network Against Family Abuse
Founder, MOMMY GO BYE-BYE: Mothers Against Unjust Law
7831 Enola Street, #TA7, McLean, Virginia 22102
VWyvell@patriot.net

MAUL (Mothers Against Unjust Law) Goals:
Rebuttable PRESUMPTIONS Against Custody for Batterers
PPAs (Parenting Plan Agreements) before Litigation
Moratorium on CCEs (Child Custody Evaluations)
MINIMUM Parent-Time Schedules (UTAH Code)
JURY Trials (in Domestic Relations Cases)
PROTECTIVE Parent Reform Acts
DIGITAL Courtroom Records
ALI's Approximation Rule
TERM LIMITS for Judges