Home : Getting Started : Father to Father: Home School Family Spends One Week in Court

Home School Family Spends

One Week in Court

Doug Sims

           My wife and I are always trying to broaden our children’s education by incorporating interesting learning experiences.  Recently we had the privilege of spending a week watching a criminal assault trial from start to finish.  In retrospect, I see that God’s hand was directing us.

            A few weeks ago, I received a jury summons requiring my presence at the district courtroom on a Monday morning.  I groaned inwardly at the thought of missing a day or more of work.  Then my wife and I realized she had a doctor’s appointment that same morning.  We homeschool our four children, aged 7 to 13, and are accustomed to changing the schedule, but this seemed too much to ask.  I considered requesting a hardship exemption from jury service.  But after praying about the problem, I decided this was just the sort of real-life experience we wanted to give to our children.  In fact, we realized that watching a day of jury selection would give our older boys a lesson in civics and good citizenship.

            I called the district clerk’s office and asked if I could bring my two older sons.  It was obvious that that office had never heard such a request.  After some consulting, I was told that it would be fine to bring the children but that they might have to spend part of the time in the hallway.

            Early Monday morning, I took the older children with me to the courthouse, and my wife took the younger two with her.  In the hallway outside the courtroom, a man from the clerk’s office was greeting jury pool members and directing them into the courtroom.  When I asked about my sons, he smiled and said that they were welcome in the courtroom to watch the jury selection process.  Obviously the clerk and her staff had discussed the unusual situation and decided we were harmless.

            The jury selection process is called voir dire.  Many potential jurors had been called.  Some qualified for automatic exemptions. A dozen or so simply did not appear.  The judge fined them for failing to perform their civic duty.  The remaining fifty of us were randomly assigned numbers and seated in order.  I was the last seated, virtually guaranteeing I would not be chosen for this jury.  My relief turned to resignation when we were told that the selection process would probably take all day.  It did.

            The accused was being tried for aggravated assault.  Attorneys for the prosecution and defense began questioning the jury pool.  At times the questions were general (“Do you know any of the parties involved?”).  At times they were blunt and aimed at specific jury pool members, dealing with their feelings on firearms’ use and ownership or their ability to make impartial judgments.  At times certain pool members would consult with the judge and attorneys at the bench and be either excused or sent back to their seats.

            The process was very interesting.  That afternoon my sons and I became fascinated with the legal system and with the facts of the case.  Even more amazing, the attorneys, their staffs, and even the judge began taking a personal interest in our family.  The defense attorney’s wife was present and advised him on juror selection.  She began visiting with my sons during breaks, explaining her role in the process and answering their questions.

            Late that afternoon the jury was selected.  I was released, along with the other pool members not chosen.  We decided to stay until the end of the day.  During one break the judge said, “Mr. Sims, we are glad to have your family with us today.  If you have any questions, please come forward during recesses.  Anything you do not understand, we would be glad to explain.”  We were thrilled.  The defense attorney also approached us that afternoon.  He and his wife encouraged us to come back that week and learn how criminal trials are conducted.  Sensing one of my reservations, they assured me that the content of the trial would be suitable for children and that it would be an ideal case to watch.

            After some general instructions to the jury, the judge adjourned for the day, instructing everyone to reappear at 9 a.m. on Tuesday.  Then he invited us to come to the front and visit with the attorneys and himself.  By this time, we felt very welcome and we asked several questions about the day’s proceedings.  We also met the prosecuting attorneys.  They all encouraged us to return that week, as the trial would be an ideal tool for learning.

            Driving home that evening, I realized that the people working in our criminal justice system were fairly ordinary people who had assumed extraordinary responsibilities.  They work hard, and they appreciated the fact that we were taking an interest.  Sadly, it was also obvious that very few citizens ever bothered to find out whether or not our system of justice was working properly.  Most officers of the court were performing their jobs for noble reasons and were rarely appreciated for their work.  They constantly battle apathy, stereotyping, and cynicism.

            I prayed again about what to do next.  I had to finish some jobs that week, and I felt guilty about the children missing any more school.  But I knew we probably would never have another opportunity like this one, and we were learning things in that courtroom that we could never learn in our classroom at home.  We had completed that day’s math assignments during court recesses, and the children were very interested in the proceedings.  Also, I felt that they might be considering career choices in the justice system in the future.  My wife and I talked it over that night and decided that I would take all four children back to court the next day.

On the way to the courthouse the next morning my children and I read some relevant passages from the United States Constitution.  My wife had spent several years giving them a good, broad foundation of world history.  So they understood some of the historic context in which our system of justice was formed.  The goal of our criminal justice system is to execute justice.  We have laws which authorize the government to punish criminal activity but which also prevent the abuse of power.  We discussed the horrible prospect of failure to restrain evildoers.  We also discussed the wisdom of such safeguards as the right to trial by jury, whereby a defendant’s guilt is determined by his peers rather than by the government.  We agreed that we are greatly blessed to have a relatively stable legal environment. Tuesday morning was consumed with opening arguments from the prosecution and the defense.  The accused had shot his brother-in-law during a family quarrel.  Both sides hinted that the case would boil down to whether he was acting in self-defense, i.e., whether he had been confronted with sufficient threat to justify his use of force.  The victim spent several days in the hospital undergoing treatment for abdominal injuries.  The attorneys reviewed the relevant laws and outlined their cases.  Special emphasis was given to the high standard of proof required in criminal trials.  To convict, the jury must unanimously determine that the accused is guilty of the charges against him beyond a reasonable doubt.

            From Tuesday afternoon through Thursday morning the prosecution examined witnesses, and the defense cross-examined.  The witnesses included the victim’s mother and sister, the victim, a ballistics expert, and law enforcement personnel.  Some of the testimony was confusing.  Some was terribly sad.  There were some very funny episodes.

            As home schooling parents, we realized that our children were exposed to many real-life lessons that week.  We saw examples of the painful consequences of sinful and foolish life choices.  We became aware of the terrible responsibility assigned to the jury—making a decision that could send a man to prison for many years.  We gained great respect for law enforcement officers.  Most of them work very hard, for noble reasons, under difficult conditions, and for low pay.  Their demeanor on the stand was professional and impartial.  We also gained a deep appreciation for the criminal judge’s responsibility to ensure a fair trial

            The older children retained their fascination with the trial.  My wife and I took turns conducting our classroom in the courtroom.  The trial dominated our thoughts and conversations all week.  We continued to develop deeper layers of understanding and appreciation.  We visited frequently with the lawyers.  The courtroom became a familiar place, and we grew more comfortable with the procedures and customs of our judicial branch of government.

            Most interesting of all, the lawyers from both sides became more frank and open as the trial continued.  We overcame our natural reservations and asked more direct questions, and their answers were very honest and forthright.  They revealed strategic details that amazed us.  They discussed their reasons for juror choices, why they chose particular strategies, their reasons for not calling certain witnesses or asking certain questions, and why they raised or failed to raise objections at different times.  They frankly discussed the strengths and weaknesses of their cases.  Sometimes both sides would visit with us together.  It became apparent that they enjoyed their careers and wanted to share that love with us.

            Thursday was the climax of the trial.  The defense rested without calling any witnesses.  The accused chose to exercise his right not to testify, not believing the prosecution had persuasively proven its case.  The two sides presented closing arguments.  Court recessed while the jury deliberated.  After over an hour of deliberation word spread that the jury had reached a verdict.  The courtroom began filling with anxious friends and family.  Before calling in the jury, the judge sternly warned both sides that they must contain their emotions after the verdict was announced and that anyone involved in altercations near the courthouse would be jailed for contempt of court.

            Then the jury was called in.  They announced a guilty verdict.  A moment of silence was followed by whispers and then a buzz of conversation.  My family was surprised.  We had predicted that the jury would be persuaded by the self-defense argument.  The accused and his attorney were obviously disappointed.  The judge released the jury until the following day, at which time they would decide on a sentence.  Then the family of the victim left the courtroom, followed moments later by the family of the accused.  We were left in the courtroom with the attorneys and officers of the court.

            By now we were all comfortable with each other.  During jury deliberations the defense attorney visited at length with the children, urging them to consider careers in the legal profession, talking about his own children, and showing our children his sports car.  After adjournment, the judge came to the back of the courtroom and visited with us again at length, expressing a warm hospitality not usually associated with judges.  And, finally, the prosecutor took us downstairs for a tour of his cramped courthouse office.  We were amazed to find his office decorated with toys, including hundreds of Pez dispensers.  He was warm, kind, and friendly, and left a very favorable impression on us all.

            I continue to reflect on the experiences of that week.  What a wonderful opportunity!  We have so little time with our children before they are grown and on their own.  Why did I ever hesitate to take advantage of that opportunity?

            What a wonderful system of justice we have.  I do not know if the jury’s verdict was correct; only God knows.  But I know that, from beginning to end, everyone in that system was striving to guarantee a fair trial, and I think they succeeded.  As with so many of God’s blessings, we under-appreciate the freedoms we enjoy in this country.  These freedoms were secured at great cost by men and women of extraordinary courage.  We owe many generations a debt of gratitude.

            1 Peter 2:13-14 reads, “Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.”  We sometimes forget that our government is used by God to dispense His justice among men.

            Government fails in many ways to be what it should.  We have tried to teach our children that no institution can be perfect when operated by fallen men and women, no matter how Divine in its conception.  But I must admit that I have developed a cynical attitude, which is not always warranted.  There are good things happening in our country every day, and we should appreciate the devoted people who are responsible for them.

            We hope that the experiences of that week will be valuable to our children.  May God bless them in whatever work He has for them.

            We urge other home schooling moms and dads not to lose sight of the goal.  Home schooling broadens our opportunities to train our children.  I hope that, in my sharing of this experience, you will be encouraged not to pass up these wonderful opportunities, like I almost did.

Meet Doug Sims

To begin receiving the Texas Home School Coalition REVIEW, simply send us your mailing information via email, phone, or mail, and mention that you would like to be added to the REVIEW subscription list.

Back to Father to Father

Back to Leader Letter

TOP