I got up at 7:00am on a typical NYC Monday morning to make my way to jury duty. I had been summoned in the past (three times actually) but either didn’t serve (I moved twice across states) or couldn’t serve (I out of the country and asked for a postponement). My new jury summons letter arrived exactly a week before I was expected in court—on a date I remember providing on the previous postponement form. This time, I didn’t postpone.

This purpose of this blog post is to share an account of my first-time experience with jury duty, which happened to take place in New York City. I had spent a lot of time googling information about what to expect, how long the process would last, how many postponements one is allowed, etc, and while I had a general sense, what I really wanted was something more thorough. Hence, what I hope to share here is a detailed mapping of my encounters and thoughts while serving my jury duty. I apologize in advance for the dearth of photos—taking photos was strictly prohibited within the courthouse premises. I did, however, try to capture as much as I could with my eyes and to note my observations by hand into my planner.

I end the post with some resources that I found useful.

Day 0: Calling a number for instructions for jury duty

1-866-721-5879

This was the number provided on my summons letter. I called this number on the date indicated (since my jury duty was to commence on a Monday, I called on a Friday). I listened to a pre-recorded message about what to expect: I should plan to serve 3 full days, from 9am-5pm; however, if I am selected for the case, then my jury duty will extend beyond those 3 days. The specific duration would depend on the nature of the trial.

What to bring

The audio-recorded message also instructed me to bring with me a pen (blue or black ink) and my summons letter. It also instructed that I complete the information requested within the summons ahead of arriving. There would be free Wifi, so laptops were welcomed.

I brought with me some additional items with me, after doing some research ahead of time:

• Water bottle (there were two water fountains on most floors in the building I was in—111 Centre Street)

• Books to read (for when you are in the courtroom itself; no devices allowed at this point)

• Snacks (for when you are waiting to be called for a case; no food inside the courtroom, though)

• Charger for my devices (there were several outlets, and people were eager to share, contrary to what I read on Reddit…)

• Layers of clothing (sometimes the rooms are really warm; other times, rather chilly!)

• Extra pen to lend to a fellow juror who forgot their pen

• Cash (for the vending machines and for lunch in Chinatown!)

• Breakfast (to eat while waiting or during your commute to the courthouse)

Day 1: Waiting, more waiting, and finally jury selection

8:30am

So many people here on jury duty. I’m glad I got here on time, which is 15 min early. Went through a metal detector (I carried my morning drink through the detector, but had to remove my watch), went up to the 3rd floor (though half the people went up to the 11th floor), and managed to claim a seat at a bench while waiting for the jury assembly hall to open. 

There are people here of all backgrounds. Even an older cute dog accompanying its owner. Probably a service dog? Anyhow, people have brought their breakfast with them, coffee to go, books to read, laptops to work on, phones to browse, forms to fill out. The people keep coming. They are now lining the walls and leaning against the window sills. Yes, glad I got here early.

Outside the wide window are tall barren trees. It is winter after all. I appreciate the expansive scenery—it is a sunny day and the buildings are glistening. I’m counting squirrels. One, two, three at least. They’re a source of movement and of time passing for me as I wait.

I glance at my watch. It’s 4 mins to 9am. I still have more than half of my vanilla chai from Dunkin’ to drink (this was my drink of choice throughout my 5 years of teaching; I would’ve have survived my 50 min commute in the morning without it). I wonder if I should use the restroom before I go in. Where is the bathroom anyhow? 

9:00am

Doors opened promptly. We entered a larger room with three aisles of cushioned seats. At the front is a large wooden table where a courthouse clerk is sitting. She addressed us with a microphone. She gave an overview of the day, read out criteria that would disqualify us as jurors (e.g. not a U.S. citizen, not a resident of a New York borough, having committed a felony, having already served in the past 4 years, not able to speak or understand English, currently a student and hence cannot serve right now, etc). 

I decide to stay put, even though I am a full-time graduate student. Classes don’t start until next week for me and so I decide to take the risk of serving and hoping I don’t get picked for a trial. And if I do get picked, I’m hoping that the trial doesn’t last for more than a week... If I had left the room (they send you to 60 Centre Street, Room 139 to reschedule), I knew I would have to reschedule AGAIN and that there would come a time when I would have to serve and I would still be a student. From Reddit threads (here, here, and here), I learned it is best to serve rather than postpone. 

9:30am

We watched a short video that was certainly outdated since it mentioned MySpace as a “social website.” It was meant to be serious but I think half of the people in the room found it entertaining. The clerk had a good sense of humor as well, which I appreciated. I loved the part in her “speech” about the vending machines in the room not being cooperative at times and that she would give us permission to shake the vending machine if our snack item doesn’t get dispensed. She also mentioned she would leave a large supply of magazines “for jurors from jurors.” It’s quite a bonding experience, I guess.

Shortly after, the clerk had us line up when our last name letter was called (first it was A to L, then M to R, and finally S to Z). Since I recently had my name changed (I had to note this on the summons document—C and E sections), I lined up at the end. At this point, we handed in our C and E sections of the summons and received an information card to fill out (in pencil or blue or black ink). We kept the top section of the summons “as a souvenir” and one of the juror cards for our record (used as identification).

10:11am

We received a bonus break until 10:30am. For this break, we didn’t have to sign out and could leave the jury assembly room and even the building. For all other breaks, we were allowed to take on our own time (15 mins and up to 20 mins) by signing out with our name and time (there’s a clipboard for this). The idea is that if we are called when we are on break, we would not be labeled “AWOL” (a military term, I guess). I took a bathroom break during the bonus break just to be safe. 

Within the main jury assembly room on the 3rd floor, there are 3 smaller rooms providing a range of seating options. For the break, I decided to go into one of the smaller rooms that had a communal table at which to work. There was a TV monitor (turned off), along with chairs lining the walls, and a few power outlets. 

11:00am

The first jury call. Those in the smaller rooms were asked to enter the main room so that we could announce our presence if our name was called. Some 40 names were called I think. I couldn’t keep track since I was paying attention to my own name. Those called were asked to say “here” in a “booming voice” and to take all belongings and enter the hallway, pick up a yellow card, and await instructions. I wasn’t called so I returned to the small room. Not sure what to think about this. 

12:20pm

The next call happened right before lunchtime. This was considered a “small call” of 16 people in the room. The instructions were different this time. After a name was called, the individual was asked to walk up to the front, pick up a questionnaire, and make a note of the seat number (1-16). The seat number was for a juror box in a room behind the doors of the front of the assembly room. It seemed like this was for a smaller case requiring fewer jurors? Again, I was not called at this time, so I returned to the small room with all my belongings and settled back in. I had almost fallen asleep listening to a New Yorker article on my iPad when the announcement of a small call was made. I returned to that same article, after a round of checking emails on my phone. 

12:35pm

The third call came quickly and unexpectedly 15 minutes later. I gathered my belongings and entered the main assembly room to listen for my name. A long list of names was called this time, and the direction was to go to the entrance of the room and gather a yellow card from the officer at the door and then await instructions. This was another large call. I waited with eager anticipation. The name “Catherine” did get called but it wasn’t my last name. I got a little excited. The call ended and my name still wasn’t called. I returned to my small room. At this point, the room looked and felt foreign, with only a handful of us left. Specifically 8. I was the only one seated at the long wooden table spanning the center of the room. I wondered whether I should make a dash for the restroom. Before I had time to deliberate, I heard another announcement. This time, for lunch. We would have until 2:15pm for lunch. YES! Typically, lunch is from 1-2pm.

Lunch break

The 1.5 hours passed quickly. I ended up going to Xi’an Famous Food on Bayard Street (within Chinatown), about a 6-mins walk from the court building. I followed the recommendation of a blog post specifically for jury duty in New York City (see the bottom of this post for resources). The short walk was nice. I appreciated the fresh air (or as fresh as it gets in the city) because the assembly room and juror lounges were making me very sleepy (low oxygen?). I also realized I hadn’t walked along Bayard Street before, which is home to many Chinese eateries. I will have to return for the Chang Fen at Yin Ji (long broad noodles, Guangzhou-style), which had a long line out the door. 

1:50pm

Shortly before 2pm, I started making my way back to the court house. I wanted to have enough time to go through security, use the restroom, fill my water bottle, and get comfortable before the afternoon calls. I also wanted to check out more eateries in the area! As I was making my way to the restroom inside the assembly room, I noticed two juror cards already in the wooden box. The box is for holding the paper juror ID cards of those jurors who are “dismissed,” “excused,” or “not selected” for a trial but who are counted as having served jury duty for going through the selection process. How lucky (or not? Depending on your attitude I guess) for checking the “jury duty” box after only half a day! 

2:12pm

With only 3 mins to the afternoon start time, I decided it was too late to take out my iPad to resume listening to The New Yorker. Instead, I checked my email once again and scrolled through Instagram. I wondered whether my name would finally get called today, or if I needed to come back tomorrow for another round of the “waiting game.”

Okay no announcement so I read a book. 

2:50pm

My name is finally called, along with some 50-60 other names??? Or so it seems... I wonder who wasn’t called at this point! Okay confirmed, everyone was called at this point. Those who didn’t were asked to go up to the counter (because you clearly did something wrong!)

The remaining account for Day 1 is not going to be as thorough, since I only managed to jot down a few things by hand while in the courtroom—no devices were allowed.

After we waited for everyone to exit the jury assembly room, we were escorted by a court officer to another floor, where the courtrooms were. We waited a few minutes, and when the judge was ready for us, we entered the courtroom and took a seat in a row-by-row basis. Because I was at the front of the “line,” I was also one of the first to take a seat. As a result, I was in the very first row, behind the defendant and their* attorneys (*I’m using “their” in the singular sense here to protect the gender identity of the defendant).

The judge addressed us. We all stood up, raised our right hand, swore an oath, and sat down. Then, the judge gave a very brief overview of the case, introduced the defendant, introduced their lawyers, and introduced the district attorney representing the other side. The purpose for today was to select the trial jurors for a civil case that would last at most 5 days. The judge told us that we would skip Tuesdays because she doesn’t work, and that those on the jury would need to be available for all 5 days. Those we wanted to make a case for excusal/dismissal from the case were told to form a line and to speak with the judge and the attorneys.

There was little time to think this through. The court officer began with the first rows and asked if anyone wanted to make a case to be excused. We had to decide then and there and stand up. Then he moved to the second row, and so forth. One by one, individuals entered the “boxed” area at the front of the courtroom and made an argument for why he/she cannot serve.

Individual situations that resulted in being excused from the case

Because I was seated in the first row, I was able to hear some of the arguments made for dismissal. Of course, I could not hear everything (some spoke very quietly, trying to be discreet), but here are some situations that the judge excused:

• Scheduled travel

  • For work (some woman had a trip planned for Ireland for her work; she did not need to provide paper evidence beyond indicating when her flight would leave)

  • For leisure (? I could not hear this one fully, but I did hear “skiing trip” from the individual and “have fun, but don’t hurt yourself” from the judge)

• Physician on-call: This individual explained that he was the physician on-call and that he had to be available to answer phone calls (and also go to the hospital for urgent situations)

• Teaching special education students at a small charter school

  • The judge spoke at length with the potential juror about her situation. She was hesitant to excuse public school teachers (she said that you can get a substitute to cover your classes for 5 days); however, the teacher made a case that she teaches a “high-need population” and that her charter school does not have a reliable substitute teacher network, among other things I could not hear well.

• Graduate student defending thesis/proposal hearing

  • A few graduate students were NOT excused (including one who said she would be missing the first day of classes—my situation exactly); however, this individual was because she had brought in “evidence” of her scholarly work. I think she was saying that she was scheduled to defend her thesis/dissertation, or to present her proposal, or something of that nature.

• New job/employment

  • There were several cases of younger potential jurors asking to be excused because they were starting in a new job/position and felt missing work would reflect badly on their performance. The judge agreed; she did not want to jeopardize their employment.

Selecting the initial 16 potential jurors

When all the cases for excusal were made, the actual jury selection process began. A court clerk placed all of our juror ID cards (collected in the morning) in this spinning wheel apparatus, and randomly drew out 16 cards, reading off the names one-by-one (and spelling out the last name, letter-by-letter). When a person’s name was called, that person had to collect all of his/her belongings and take a particular seat inside the jury box. My name was not called.

Then, the judge asked a series of yes-no questions to the 16 potential jurors, ranging from “Do you know the defendant, the attorneys, the people on the witness list?” to “You interpret the evidence, I interpret the law and follow my instructions, can you do that?” to “Have you had any kind of experience relating to the nature of the case?” If someone answered no/shook their head/did not nod, that person had to elaborate more in front of everyone in the room. However, for more sensitive topics, the team consisting of the judge, the lawyers, the transcriber, and the court clerk met with the potential jurors individually in a separate small room to discuss further.

By the time this process ended, it was already 5pm. Because time was up, the judge stated that jury selection would continue during the next working day. Everyone not called (everyone in the “audience”) was asked to return at 10am.

Day 2: Picking jurors for a trial is a fascinating process

Jury selection continued for another full day. Because I spent the entire day in the actual courtroom, where cell phone and other device use was strictly forbidden, I was not able to make detailed notations on the spot. Hence, for Day 2, rather than map out my day with timestamps, I will convey my experience more holistically.

Get ready to get close up and personal: Questioning by the judge in front of everyone

At around 10am, the doors to the court room (we were on the 7th floor) opened and all potential jurors and members of the audience were escorted in by the court officers. Potential jurors were asked to take their assigned seat in the jury box and all audience members were asked to fill the rows. I made my way again to the front row, this time on the left side of the room, which was the side closer to the jury box (at least in this particular court room). Once everyone got seated, I immediately noticed that 6 seats were unfilled from the previous call (on Monday). So, naturally, one of the clerks took out the spinning wheel thing and spun out 6 more names as potential jurors. My juror card was not among those pulled. The judge went through the routine round of questioning (same as the previous day), pulled individual jurors aside to discuss further. 3 potential jurors were excused.

Instead of pulling another 3 names, the judge continued with a line of questioning of individual seated jurors, beginning with the person seated at #1. A microphone was passed around so that everyone could hear the responses. I observed that the attorneys for both the defendant and the accuser (there’s probably a more technical term) took notes.

All of the questions were personal in nature:

1. Where were you born?

2. (If born outside of New York): What brought you to New York?

3. What is your profession? What do you do for a living?

4. What is your educational background?

5. Where do you live? What neighborhood in the city (without giving away the specific address)?

6. With whom do you live and what to they do? (It did not matter if you lived with a boyfriend/girlfriend, spouse, children, roommates—you had to disclose their profession)

7. What are your hobbies? What do you do for fun?

8. Have you ever been a victim of a crime? Witnessed a crime? Been accused of a crime? Been part of a civil lawsuit? (If yes to any of these, you were asked to elaborate. If the content is sensitive in nature, you can ask to share in private)

9. Do you have any family members or friends who are part of law enforcement (lawyers, police officers, government official, etc)? Who and what are their connections to you? 

More questioning by the attorneys for both parties

After the judge asked her questions, the district attorney (DA) representing the people of city of New York (in this case, the alleged victim/accuser) was given about 15 or 20 mins of follow-up questioning of the seated potential jurors. Some were specific to individuals based on their previous responses. Others were addressed to the collective group and responses took the form of raising your hand or nodding/shaking your head. Without giving away details of the case (and certainly without presenting any evidence), the DA hinted at the nature of the offense/allegation.

I am intentionally leaving this section vague because I am prohibited from sharing details of the case (obviously). What I hope to convey is just the very personal nature of the questions. Potential jurors were asked to give their opinion, to share their moral values and philosophies, and to imagine hypothetical situations and share what they would do/could do/unable to do/etc. 

The floor was then given to the defense attorney to also ask questions. He had the same amount of time, although I think the judge was quite lenient. The attorney representing the defendant had a different way of questioning the potential jury. I felt that he used less objective language, to which the DA claimed “objection!” (just like in the movies! haha). The judge, in that instance, responded with “sustained.” I personally took issue with the language used, so I understood why the DA might have objected. This particular attorney had very good interpersonal skills, and spent more time building a relationship with the jury. I thought that was quite interesting.

“You interpret the evidence; I state the law. Can you do this?”

This was the statement/question that the judge gave at an early point during jury selection (before the individual questioning and sharing of personal information). I share this now because when the defense attorney asked his questions, the concept of what is immoral versus illegal came up. He emphasized that while you might not agree with something, or feel differently about a situation, you have to base your judgment on the sole facts presented, and whether the evidence suggests something unlawful. In other words, he asked that the jurors put their morals aside and focus on what is legal or illegal (based on the instructions provided by the judge).

No place for emotions (or rather, emotions don’t matter)

The notion of leaving emotions out of one’s judgment of the facts/evidence was also stressed. This part made me pause and think. It agitated me. Then puzzled me. And finally bewildered me even. Emotions were more or less looked down upon in the courtroom. They could be displayed but they should not “count”; they should not persuade an individual one way or another. They do not belong in reasoning, in keeping an open mind, in deliberating. Emotions do not matter in the courtroom; emotions might even taint the evidence. Or rather, they are separate from and should be quarantined from one’s evaluation of the evidence. 

Pretty much everyone agreed that they would leave emotions out. I was stunned. How can you, really? As humans, we are, after all social beings with feelings, who are affected. I guess I wouldn’t have made it very far in jury selection, because my morals and my emotions would get in the way, even if I tried to play my teacher poker face.

Extended lunch for those in the audience

12:45pm: Those of us in the audience (to which I belonged) were dismissed for lunch. Those sitting in the juror box had to remain longer. 

I made good use of my extended lunch break. I returned to Chinatown, walking along Bayard Street. This time, I made my way to Yin Ji Chang Fen. There was a short line, but nothing compared to the line from the other day. I waited about 10 minutes and then I was in! The restaurant was relatively clean with minimalistic decor. My order was ready within 10 minutes. I got greedy and ordered two entrees: minced beef congee and rice noodle rolls with chicken (both typical Guangzhou cuisine). I ended up finishing the rice noodle rolls, but only 2/3 of the congee (the bowl was very large), so I took the rest home. Didn’t want to waste anything!

I took a 20-minute stroll around the neighborhood and then made my way back to 111 Centre Street, passing by 100 Centre Street where Harvey Weinstein was having his trial.

The big surprise: Jury box cleared out for another round of selection

2:15pm: All of us returned to the courtroom to find an empty juror box. We were continuing with yet another call. 16 additional names were spun out from the “wheel.” My name was still not called. The judge resumed her questioning—individuals were pulled to speak in private with the legal representatives. 6 were excused. We went from 16 to 10 potential jurors and so another 6 names were pulled. Mine still wasn’t one of them. More questioning. More excusing of potential jurors. We were down to 13 potential jurors and another 3 names were pulled. Still no Catherine Stahl. More questioning. 1 person was excused. 

At this point, there were 15 potential jurors sitting in the box to be questioned individually by the judge, and then by the two parties of attorneys. The questioning ended at 4:40pm. All audience and potential jurors were asked to leave the courtroom for some time to allow the legal team to deliberate. 

4:55pm: Everyone was called back into the courtroom. The judge kept it brief: All of us in the audience were excused. The judge thanked us for our service.

Day 3: None for me, though serving on trial would’ve been fun

There were 16 of us remaining in the audience by the end of Day 2 of jury selection. Since our name was never pulled in the courtroom, our jury duty was counted as “served.” Jury selection was not complete, but the legal team had 3 “batches” of potential jurors to select their final 12 and did not need a third day of jury selection. It would have been a good experience to serve on the jury—perhaps next time, the earliest of which would be 4 years from now.

The court officer who escorted us out of the courtroom on Day 2 explained to everyone in the audience that we would receive documentation of our jury service in 4-6 weeks, including a payment of $80 (for 2 days) if our employer does not pay for jury duty. If an employer needed proof of jury duty earlier, the employer would need to call the courthouse number directly.

Curated Selection of Resources for Jury Duty in NYC

• Official NYC Juror Q&A

• Jury Duty in Brooklyn

• Sites with recommendations for Lunch when on Jury Duty in Manhattan: The Infatuation, GrubStreet (a bit out-of-date)

• Some Reddit threads about jury duty in NYC (here, here, and here)