Sunday, February 27, 2005

Love and jury duty

Today's New York Times Weddings and Celebrations features a story about finding love on jury duty....
In the jury box, where Erika Leigh Ozer and Dr. Jeremy David Sperling became acquainted, they were deeply divided over the evidence before them - differences that contributed to a hung jury. But there was one thing they came to agree on: they wanted to see each other again after the trial.
What a lead! New York's Chief Judge Judith Kaye is a strong and effective proponent of New York jury reform. I've heard her mention in public speeches that jury duty is a great place to meet people. It worked for Ozer and Sperling -- they served together on a jury in August of 2001, and were married in February 2005.

That hung jury worries me though. The story writer Jennifer Tung says that
Ms. Ozer and nine others voted for the conviction of the drug dealer; Dr. Sperling (who doubted the credibility of the main witness) and one other juror did not. Although the trial resulted in a hung jury, Ms. Ozer's and Dr. Sperling's opposing views in the courthouse had no impact on their growing friendship and budding romance.
In a hopeful spin, the bridegroom's dad says that the newlyweds "certainly challenge each other, but they seem to have an effective resolution mechanism. They do a great job of negotiating."

Why didn't they negotiate to a verdict then?

Can this marriage last?

2 Comments:

Blogger Clay S. Conrad said...

Knowing how to agree to disagree is the first step in having a successful marriage.

And knowing that some things are not open for compromise (like, say, someone else's liberty) sounds like a pretty mature perspective as well.

I kind of liked his vote better, though. If they DO get divorced, it will be because she was being unreasonable.

9:32 PM  
Blogger Clickbank Mall said...

Come Visit Santa at his blog and tell him what you want for Christmas,

1:52 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home