There is nothing paid in civil causes to jurors cited to attend the court but not empanelled as jurors.
If the nature of the disqualification is made clear to people who are empanelled on a jury, they would be committing a criminal offence by serving on that jury.
If, on the other hand, one empanels a jury from the other side of the town, that jury is afraid of victimisation.
Immediately the jury has retired another jury is empanelled to try the next case and you start trying the case while the first jury is still considering its verdict.
In those circumstances, why go to the bother of all those poor people being empanelled and being put upon to serve on juries?
I found to my dismay that when the jury was empanelled it was a jury of males.
The jury was not sworn, but had been empanelled.
However, it is a remarkable thing that in fraud cases it is not unusual when the jury is empanelled to discover that some jurors cannot read.
