Darkoshi

I've been summoned for jury duty already again, barely a year after the last summons. This time it is for a "magistrate" court. The summons mailing indicated I should fill out and return the form, but didn't include a return envelope like last time. The address is written in very small text, and the form was folded on that line, making it even harder to read. The form also says, in slightly larger text, "PERSONS FAILING TO RETURN THESE FORMS AS REQUESTED MAY BE SUBJECT TO CHARGES OF CONTEMPT OF COURT".
I am curious what their actual return rate of forms is, considering all the above. I wonder if they just forgot to include the return envelope.

.

This evening I kept hearing noises by the doggy door. At first it sounded like something scratching at it, trying to come inside. That raised my hackles, as our doggy was inside laying on her bed. I locked the doggy door and looked outside, but whatever it was seemed to be gone.

Earlier this evening while outside, I had heard what sounded like a pack of coyotes howling. They must be living down in the undergrowth of the mostly dry lakebed. Surely it couldn't have been a coyote at the door? Maybe a cat?

We've had many toads and frogs sneak inside, but they don't make nose.

Later I heard noises again, now more like thumps against the glass window. I finally discovered a cicada by the bottom edge of the door flap. I moved it away. Later I discovered two cicadas on the nearby screen of the kitchen window, apparently attracted to the kitchen light. I considered leaving the kitchen light on all night. Better to have them at the window than down by the doggy door where they might get inside.

The next time I checked, the two cicadas were still on the window screen, but there was a green katydid down by the bottom of the doggy door flap!

Now I've chased off the katydid at least.

Oh sh*t. Another thump and scratching (that must be their legs or wings skittering on the glass) at the doggy door window even though I closed the blinds and dimmed the lights. What is it tonight?

I received a summons for jury duty next month. That once again made me glad I got my 2nd booster shot already. If I end up being selected for a jury, and if it's like last time where we had to spend hours together in a small room, discussing the case and having meals brought to us to eat in that same room...

I wonder what they would do if a jury member tested positive while a multi-day trial was still underway. Would they be excused? Would the jury member have to present a test stick showing the positive test as proof? I wonder if they are selecting more than the usual number of alternates for juries now because of that possibility.

I wonder what you're supposed to do if you get a positive test result right before the summons date. The summons letter doesn't mention anything about COVID or other illnesses. It says "Failure to appear at the address above at the specified time may subject you to penalties as prescribed by law."

.

This is bad news: The COVID Event Horizon

On May 24, 2022, the CDC, of all places, announced that more than 1 in 5 COVID cases results in Long COVID. ... The next day, a study in Nature Medicine revealed that vaccines only reduce the risk of Long COVID by 15%.

That article has much other interesting info too.

This page on the Apple.com site: Government Information Requests
states: In the second half of 2016, Apple received between 5,750 and 5,999 National Security Orders.

Apple's Transparency Reports - contain details on the various customer information requests received by Apple from 2013 through 2016. The number of national security orders received by Apple increased from less than 500 in 2013, to between 8500 and 9000 in 2016.

See below for the difference between "National Security Orders/Requests" versus National Security Letters.

In this prior post, I linked to another article which stated: the FBI issued nearly 13,000 NSLs in 2015 alone. But that number must have been way under-estimated. Indeed, one of the below articles indicates that over 48,000 NSLs were sent in 2015.

A Decade-Old Gag Order, Lifted (November 2015):

relying on changes made by the Patriot Act, the FBI began issuing hundreds of NSLs demanding credit reports, banking information, or records relating to Internet activity. Some of the NSLs sought information about terrorism suspects, but most sought information about people who were one, two, three, or more degrees removed from anyone suspected of having done anything wrong. According to the Justice Department’s inspector general, the FBI issued a staggering 143,074 NSLs between 2003 and 2005. And every NSL was accompanied by a categorical and permanent gag order.

That link and this one: Doe v. Holder describe a decade-long court battle to get a single gag order lifted. It mentions some changes made to the laws regarding the gag orders during that time, but I'm not clear on the final outcome. I assume that most other NSL recipients are still under similar gag orders which haven't been changed.


Newly published FBI request shines light on National Security Letters (November 2015):

In 2007, the Office of the Inspector General reported that the FBI issued approximately 40,000 to 60,000 letters per year. President Obama’s Intelligence Review Group reported more recently in 2013 that the government issued an average of nearly 60 NSLs per day.
..
Companies can only report NSLs in bands of 1,000, if they're separated from FISA court order requests, or in bands of 250 if reported as a broader "national security request."

The "national security orders" referenced on the Apple.com page must be the broader category, including FISA requests in addition to NSLs, as they are listed in bands of 250. But the last link below indicates there are less than 2000 FISA request per year, so that doesn't explain the large discrepancy in numbers.

Even the above article implies that in 2013, a total of 365*60 = 25,550 NSLs were issued, while twice as many were issued 6 years prior. I doubt the number would have decreased that much over time, if there were no legal changes governing the issuance of the requests.

US foreign intelligence court did not deny any surveillance requests last year :

The court received 1,457 requests last year [in 2015] on behalf of the National Security Agency and the FBI for authority to intercept communications, including email and phone calls. ... The court did not reject any of the applications in whole or in part, the memo showed.

The total represented a slight uptick from 2014, when the court received 1,379 applications and rejected none.
..
The memo also stated that 48,642 national security letter (NSL) requests were made in 2015 by the FBI.
..
The majority of NSL requests, 31,863, made in 2015 sought information on foreigners, regarding a total of 2,053 individuals, the memo stated.

The FBI made 9,418 requests for national security letters in 2015 for information about US citizens and legal immigrants, regarding a total of 3,746 individuals, it showed.

The FBI also made 7,361 NSL requests for only “subscriber information”, typically names, addresses and billing records, of Americans and foreigners regarding 3,347 different people.

This was my 3rd time being called in for jury duty, but the first time I was actually picked to sit on a jury. The experience was very interesting.

It was a lawsuit; I was glad it wasn't a criminal case. The trial took 3 days. We went home in the evenings. The first day, we were allowed to leave the courthouse for lunch. The next 2 days, lunch was ordered for us and we weren't allowed out.

I noticed very quickly that the demeanor and style of one of the lawyers appealed to me, and that of the other lawyer was off-putting. I did my best to ignore both feelings, and to pay unbiased attention to the proceedings. The judge seemed laid back and slightly amused, as if he'd been through thousands of similar cases. The lawyers were all obviously trying to do a good job for their clients, and I felt a bit sorry that one side or another would have to lose.

There were 12 jurors and 2 alternates. Of the total, only 2 were men.

We were instructed not to discuss the case with anyone, not even the other jurors, until all the testimony was finished. There was a jury room where we gathered in the mornings, and where we had to go each time the lawyers wanted to discuss/dispute something with the judge during the trial. We'd go into the court room, sit down, listen for a while, then have to get up, go to the jury room to wait, then return to the court room and sit down again. Repeat, repeat, repeat. I didn't count how many times.

At one point, the "cool" lawyer did a nifty thing with his glasses. He had pushed them up on his forehead while shuffling through papers, and then did a quick head movement that snapped the glasses down in place again. I'm not sure if it happened by accident, or if it was a practiced skill.

During the closing arguments, the lawyer who didn't appeal to me made religious references 3 times. First, he picked up the bible which had been used to swear in the witnesses, and talked about some particular moral story in there. I raised my eyebrow at that. Really? Later he mentioned a preacher. At the end, he picked up the bible again, and reminded us of that story again. When the other lawyer gave his rebuttal, he basically said that he didn't care about some story from 2000 years ago (that surprised me too), that we should consider the facts of this case.

I didn't realize it at the time, but a feeling of camaraderie was growing in me in regards to the other jurors and even the court officials. During those many trips to the jury room, as we weren't allowed to discuss the case, the other jurors would chat. One lady especially, told several entertaining stories about her life. When we were finally allowed to debate the case, it was an amicable process, even though voices got loud as opinions were shared. Our decision had to be unanimous, and we eventually came to one.

Back in the courtroom, the foreman handed off our written decision to the judge. The judge flipped through the pages and stared at the last page for a long time. I began to worry that we'd done something wrong; that the judge would declare a mistrial. But he finally handed the sheets to the clerk, who read out the decision, and then it was over.

At the end, I realized that I'd likely never see these people again, and even if I did, I'd probably not recognize them or remember where I knew them from. It made me feel slightly sad. People with whom you've shared a special experience as well as minor hardships. Having to report for duty each day, with the threat of officers coming after you, if you didn't make it there on time. Having to spend time in a small room together. Having to sit quietly in court, paying close attention to everything. Having to tuck* my shirt tail in.

In the hours and days afterward, I wondered if we'd made the right decision. It seemed like we had, based on what was presented to us. But what about the things that hadn't been presented? What about the things we were sent out of the court room, not to hear? The trial being over, I finally did some internet searches to find more information on the case. I found a little, but not much. (Actually, it surprised me that the judge never told us not to do any internet searches before the trial was over - unless he did and I somehow missed it. But I assumed that we shouldn't, and therefore didn't.)

*The first morning, as I was following other potential jurors into the courtroom, a bailiff waved a few guys including me to the side, telling us to tuck our shirt tails in. At first I didn't understand what he had said, but he was also pointing to a sign on the wall which said the same thing. My first reaction was to frown in annoyance, but I went ahead and did it. Maybe the bailiff mistook me for a man, but if the other guys had to do it, it seemed reasonable for me to have to do so as well. Every day after that, I was careful to remember to tuck my shirt in, in the morning. This entailed choosing a shirt which would actually look good tucked in, of which I only have a few. The others are wider and billow at my waist and look ridiculous to me when I tuck them in. But I've just now found this page, which explains the "military tuck" which I'll have to try out.