The day after the Jury Selection Process

26 November 2025

It felt to me that I had to process a lot the day after the Jury selection process. I thought that some of you, my friends, will be interested in the process and in my personal experience of that process.

I was impressed with the rigour of dedication the court system operated to uphold equality, scientific and standardized methods during the procedures of selecting a jury.

One hundred and fifty citizens were randomly summonsed to appear on the specific day to be part of a comprehensive and fair pool of possible jury members. I was one of these people. The pool of people needs to be a good sample of the public. All ages, genders, colours, sexual orientations, careers and cultures in life were represented.

After we all registered with a given registration number, the initial procedure got explained, and we waited for the next step in one hall.

All the summonsed numbers were put on cards, and we were asked to go to a courtroom where the accused with his legal representative, the crown representatives, and the court clerk were present. After the judge herself appeared, she explained every part of the process clearly and in no uncertain terms described the urgency of being neutral in all conclusions made after considering only the facts and evidence provided in the case, to ensure that true justice is served, if we were to be selected as a jury member. Then she described the charges against the accused and asked him what he pleaded.

The charges were two counts of sexual violence and one count of causing bodily harm. The accused pleaded ‘not guilty’.

The judge stressed that anyone who has strong bias about the alleged crimes, are encouraged to be honest about their feelings if they should be chosen as one of the selected possibilities. The need for neutrality was stressed.

At this point I felt my heart sink and memories of some of my professional experience as an expert witness in court cases and clients who dealt with similar themed issues came back to me. I thought to myself that I really don’t want to repeat the effect such cases had on me, so I send up a quick prayer: ‘let me only be selected on the jury if it serves my highest good at this point in my life’. I felt certain that I had already served my community in many ways and learned so much through these professional experiences as a psychologist. I questioned my soul about having to go through this kind of experience again. At this very moment I knew I will not be selected, and that is right for me. I am at a new place in my life and do not need this kind of involvement again in any capacity.

The cards with our summoned numbers were al put in a drum which the clerk spined and randomly pulled out the numbers of twenty people who were called group A. A second group of twenty people, called group B, were selected in the exact same manner. Group A were immediately taken to a jury room where they had to complete a questionnaire and wait together for individual interviews with the judge in the courtroom with all the representatives and the accused present. No-one else were present at the time of the individual interviews. We all had to move back to the initial waiting hall.

Each potential jury member’s questionnaire was evaluated by the judge before she interviewed the member. She asked two previous prepared questions to each member, in the same manner and words to everyone to secure standardisation requirements. The two questions did not appear in the questionnaire and were asked in the courtroom. O-one knew what they were and they would be constructed differently according to the case each time.

Each potential jury member had to ‘swear in’ or ‘confirm’ that they will speak the truth and only the truth before proceeding with the interview. The judge decides if the potential jury member will be serving or not according to how they answer the questions and to their responses on the questionnaire. When they are selected, they go back into the jury room where they will be waiting for the final twelve jury members to be selected after which they will be sworn in. The unselected were free to leave the courthouse. Everyone else needed to wait in case there were no appropriate members to fill the jury from the two selected groups. Twelve jury members and 2 extras were usually selected to serve on a jury.

The selection process in this particular case, seemed to be very slow, because we were told that in most cases the selection can be completed in the morning of which the court case can proceed in the afternoon.

This did not happen in this case. The first day of the jury selection process were postponed after we al registered, because the accuse could not be present. That meant that every one of the hundred and fifty people had to reappear the following day.

The selection process happened so slowly, and I had to wait with everyone who were still part of the initial pool of potential jury members that whole second day until all 14 members were selected. At one point it almost felt that we all will have to come in a third day, because the clock was close to announcing the end of the working day.

I suppose it is difficult to find neutral persons in a criminal case of such an arduous nature.

Relief was openly expressed by everyone when we all got the news that a jury was complete and the selection process were over. We could all leave the courthouse.

Another observation that impressed upon me we that the spool of people was reliant on the process to complete before anyone was free to continue with their own agenda. Until the jury were selected with satisfaction, we were part of the process until we were eliminated. The Jury itself also functions as an entity, because all of the parts need to be present at all times during the court case and eventually come to one voice in the agreement of the verdict. If any of the members of the jury fall ill, the court proceedings come to a halt until all the members can function as a team together again. It struck me that this is a simulation of how our whole society are affected when some members of it disrupts the coherence. We all need each other as we evolve together as a species. When we don’t agree or work together though, our species and communities fall in disarray and there no evolution is possible, only chaos and disintegration.

Sometimes individual experiences repeat itself in unexpected ways, as duties or opportunities to grow or learn something about life, others or oneself. Sometimes our Soul summons us to revisits experiences for clarity, and in some instances to do deeper healing. These crossroads are turning points where one’s soul may decide if it needs to repeat lessons or realizations. My summons to be part of the selection process for jury duty, was also my soul’s summons to make a conscious choice about a repetitive cycle in my life. The relief and certainty I instantly felt when I send up that little thought/prayer to my Higher Self, overruled all my doubts of where my coherent self is today. I was called to confirm this to myself. I can move on to new experiences, not repeat old ones.

Certain challenges returned to me, so I can meet them with a different frequency. These are sacred repetitions from my spirit to evolve from where I lost parts of my light, to retrieve it with consciousness, reclaiming what was lost. Wounds become wisdom that guides towards new soul contracts.

I hope that my experience helps clear up something you need in this moment.

Sending you Love and Blessings as always,

Jayni Bloch