An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
User avatar
Ormond
Posts: 932
Joined: December 30th, 2015, 8:14 pm

An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Ormond »

So I just got called for jury duty, which has inspired the following proposal which I invite you to engage. My argument is....

ASSERTION: Conscripted amateur juries should be replaced with professional juries that receive training and a salary commensurate with the seriousness of the duties they are expected to perform.

ARGUMENTS:

The United States military shifted from the draft to an all volunteer army decades ago based upon the realization that building an army out of people forced to serve against their will inevitably results in an unprofessional and unreliable military force. As example, the drafted army of the 1960's and 1970's was unable to defeat even one of the world's smallest poorest nations. Today the U.S. all volunteer army is arguably without peer across the world.

I'm arguing that the same reasoning applies to the creation of jury pools. The primary focus of jurors "drafted" against their will, on average, understandably be on how long it will be until they get to go home.

It is argued that paying jurors may create a bias for the state. However, all other members of the court except private defense attorney's are already paid by the state, and to my knowledge no one is arguing that all other members of the court are therefore unable to provide a professional service.

Thus, I assert that the slogan "civic responsibility" is really just a cover story for the less appealing reality, jurors are slave labor.

1) It is hereby argued that any trial system built upon slave labor is unprofessional and thus unfair to defendants.

2) Further, it is argued that the use of an unprofessional trial system renders the state unqualified to find a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

3) Therefore, the defendant's inherent presumption of innocence remains in tact.

4) Therefore, any juror in any trial is obligated to vote to acquit.

I'm considering informing the court in writing that if called as a juror in any trial I will vote to acquit based on the above reasoning.

Talk me out of this if you wish. Or, if all else fails, come visit me in jail. :-)
If the things we want to hear could take us where we want to go, we'd already be there.
User avatar
Aristocles
Premium Member
Posts: 508
Joined: April 20th, 2015, 8:15 am

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Aristocles »

I do argue the entire legal team cannot be professional when paid.

Your reasoning for incentive to acquit may be applicable to be unfair to both the defense AND prosecution. But, like the military example, we may well be better off empowering people more than we empower institutions.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Sy Borg »

Compensation for jury duty is token, less than unemployment benefits. If every trial required a group of trained legal professionals, court costs would go through the roof. Don't pay them enough and they become open to graft. A risky proposition to say the least.

Chances are that you'll make you complaint to some clerical underling who cares about as much as you do. It won't be passed on. Even if you declared in court that you will vote to acquit, you might get a contempt charge but, if not, you would be the first juror chosen by the defence lawyer :D

Not a good strategy IMO. When dealing with the powers that be I recommend flying under the radar. If you are acting alone, you'd do well not to attract attention.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated—Gandhi.
Gary S
Posts: 239
Joined: May 7th, 2011, 3:23 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Greta

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Gary S »

Interesting topic. Still considering it. A question:

Would a professional jury serve for a long time and on many trials, or would it be like the current system where each jury serves for only one trial?

And some thoughts:

The purpose of the military is to protect national interests. Many people volunteer for that very reason. However, many join for less than noble reasons. Not everyone joins because of the actual purpose of the military.

The purpose of a jury is to serve justice. If jurors volunteer and get paid, some may do so for less than noble reasons. Is there any guarantee that justice would be served? Another problem I can see is that criminals (organized crime) could "stack the deck" of jurors by sending lots of sympathizers to volunteer. All it would take is one sympathizer to get on the professional jury to change outcomes. Not saying that a sympathizer can't get on the jury now, but volunteering would increase the chances.
Ormond wrote:As example, the drafted army of the 1960's and 1970's was unable to defeat even one of the world's smallest poorest nations.
This is another problem with the OP. Using the military in the 1960s and 1970s as an example that forced servitude does not work is faulty. The United States military of the time could have easily won that war if the politicians had wanted them to. For those who think otherwise, consider the extreme: North Viet Nam could have been nuked off the map. War over. The U.S. military of the time was extremely strong. The political will was weak.
User avatar
Ormond
Posts: 932
Joined: December 30th, 2015, 8:14 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Ormond »

Greta wrote:Compensation for jury duty is token, less than unemployment benefits.
Yes, substantially less than minimum wage. It's like leaving a nickel tip to your waitor.
If every trial required a group of trained legal professionals, court costs would go through the roof.
I'm not sure of the exact cost, but yes, definitely more expensive. What this means is that the burden of providing courts with juries would then be shared by the entire population through their taxes, instead of being born only those who are conscripted to serve on juries. Seems more fair to me, given that the entire population benefits the the jury trial system.
Chances are that you'll make you complaint to some clerical underling who cares about as much as you do.
Yes, I agree. But it's not a complaint, but instead me disclosing my situation to the court. I agree complaints should go to the legislature, which I will be doing as well.
It won't be passed on.
My guess is that it will have to be passed on to the attorney's. If not, that's fine with me, I will have fulfilled an obligation to report my situation to the court. What happens after that is up to them.
Even if you declared in court that you will vote to acquit, you might get a contempt charge but, if not, you would be the first juror chosen by the defence lawyer :D
You could be right. If you are, I will try to post a photo of me in my orange jail jump suit.
Not a good strategy IMO. When dealing with the powers that be I recommend flying under the radar. If you are acting alone, you'd do well not to attract attention.
Oh my, this is far too cowardly for me, but ok, to each their own.

-- Updated March 8th, 2016, 9:53 am to add the following --
Gary S wrote:Would a professional jury serve for a long time and on many trials, or would it be like the current system where each jury serves for only one trial?
It seems to me the attorneys should still be able to inspect and reject jurors on a case by case basis, for each trial. So the pro jurors might be available in the courthouse, but not necessarily always sitting as jurors.
The purpose of the military is to protect national interests. Many people volunteer for that very reason. However, many join for less than noble reasons. Not everyone joins because of the actual purpose of the military.
Yes, I agree, true enough. But on balance, seeing the force as a whole, the government has decided a volunteer force is more professional and effective than a conscripted force, which I argue would apply to juries as well.
The purpose of a jury is to serve justice. If jurors volunteer and get paid, some may do so for less than noble reasons. Is there any guarantee that justice would be served?
Good question, and I believe this would be the primary challenge to a professional jury proposal.

I would counter that all members of the court (except private defense counsel) are already paid professional salaries by the state, and nobody to my knowledge is arguing that this creates a bias or prevents them from performing their functions in a professional manner.

It's upon this reasoning that I have concluded that the moralizing "civic duty" lecture given to jurors is actually bunkum, and that the reality is that jurors are a form of legalized slave labor. Wouldn't we call it slave labor if the judge, attorneys, court staff, baliff etc were compelled to serve against their will under threat of jail and paid a fraction of minimum wage?
Another problem I can see is that criminals (organized crime) could "stack the deck" of jurors by sending lots of sympathizers to volunteer. All it would take is one sympathizer to get on the professional jury to change outcomes. Not saying that a sympathizer can't get on the jury now, but volunteering would increase the chances.
I hadn't thought of that, good point. I would counter that we are going to have some problematic jurors in any case. As example, me. :-)
This is another problem with the OP. Using the military in the 1960s and 1970s as an example that forced servitude does not work is faulty. The United States military of the time could have easily won that war if the politicians had wanted them to.
Well, nukes yes.

But if you want to fight a limited conventional war (ie. not go to war with China) then this was proven quite difficult with a conscripted force who often didn't support the war, and were doing lots of drugs, and sometimes shooting their own over eager officers in the heat of battle so that no one would notice the murder etc.

Again, it's not me that concluded a conscripted force doesn't work, it was the Congress and military leaders.

-- Updated March 8th, 2016, 11:39 am to add the following --

Here's a first draft of my letter to the court, see below. Please feel free to serve as volunteer editors by offering any suggestions, thanks.


----------------

Greetings,

First, please note I am not seeking to be excused from jury duty, or requesting any other action or communication from the court.

I'm writing to fulfill an obligation I feel to inform the court in advance of my jury service that if I am selected to serve on a jury I will vote to acquit.

If you should choose to read the optional further explanation below, please note that I'm not complaining to the court, but only explaining why I will vote to acquit. I will save complaints for the Legislature.



Why I Will Vote To Acquit

Decades ago the U.S. government ended the military draft and converted to an all volunteer model based on the reasoning that requiring citizens to serve against their will results in an unprofessional and unreliable military force.

In my opinion, the very same reasoning applies to the creation of trial juries.

1) I believe conscripted amateur juries are not adequately trained, appropriately motivated, or adequately compensated to form the foundation of a professional trial system.

2) Thus, I believe that lacking a professional trial system, the state is not currently in a position to find defendants guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

3) Thus, I believe the defendant's inherent assumption of innocence remains in tact.

4) Thus, I believe that within the current system my duty as a juror is to vote to acquit.

I do realize that I will be instructed to consider only the facts of a particular case, but I sincerely believe the use of a conscripted untrained jury, and thus an unprofessional trial process, to be a very relevant fact.

As evidence, please consider what our relationship with any trial would be if the judge, attorneys and other officers of the court were also untrained citizens required to serve against their will under threat of jail and then paid a fraction of minimum wage for their contributions to the process.

In summary, I see the concept of "civic duty" in regards to conscripted jury service to be a transparent euphemism for "slave labor", an inherently unprofessional arrangement unworthy of a process as important as a trial.

I do realize that none of my opinions are a valid basis for failing to comply with a court summons, so I will of course see you in court on the scheduled date.
If the things we want to hear could take us where we want to go, we'd already be there.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Sy Borg »

Even if you declared in court that you will vote to acquit, you might get a contempt charge but, if not, you would be the first juror chosen by the defence lawyer :D
Ormond wrote:You could be right. If you are, I will try to post a photo of me in my orange jail jump suit.
Generally, defence lawyers reject those who appear most conservative.
Not a good strategy IMO. When dealing with the powers that be I recommend flying under the radar. If you are acting alone, you'd do well not to attract attention.
Ormond wrote:Oh my, this is far too cowardly for me, but ok, to each their own.
Okay, do what you will. My advice is just to choose your battles well. If this jury issue is important enough to you to expose yourself to the risks of prison, then that's your call.

I think it's all futile anyway, that the idea will cost too much to be realistic. The courts pay approx $50 per day here. Legal professionals in the role would earn closer to ten to twenty times that amount. So, instead of paying $600 for a day's trial with twelve jurors, the daily jury payment bill for that one day in that one court would be closer to $6,000. The increase in costs of professional juries would not only be unsustainable in a time when governments already cutting essential services but, as mentioned by others, the scheme also has potential to be corrupted. For instance, if you were on trial for civil disobedience, would you rather be judged by randomly selected strangers or those on The Establishment's payroll?
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated—Gandhi.
User avatar
Ormond
Posts: 932
Joined: December 30th, 2015, 8:14 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Ormond »

Generally, defence lawyers reject those who appear most conservative.
I have long hippy hair and a giant mustache, so if I can just get the orange jail jump suit to go with my letter above I should be a slam dunk candidate for the defense. Oh, and by the way counselor, did I mention I'm not wearing any underwear? I'm over the top now for sure... :-)
Okay, do what you will. My advice is just to choose your battles well. If this jury issue is important enough to you to expose yourself to the risks of prison, then that's your call.
You are giving wise advice, I agree, I really do. I may not be wise enough to heed it though. The thing is, situations like being herded around like sheep in a courthouse by state employees are so intensely boring that if I don't do something to make it interesting I might go insane.

For now, I think I'm safe so long as I don't try to give a speech in court, and drop the idea of wearing prison-like pajamas with the words "SLAVE LABOR" stamped in big letters on the back. Oh god I wanna do that so much! But I think I can restrain myself that far at least.
For instance, if you were on trial for civil disobedience, would you rather be judged by randomly selected strangers or those on The Establishment's payroll?
Yes, this is the standard complaint with such a proposal. What everyone seems to forget is that the entire court, minus private defense council, are already all on the state's payroll. The judge, state's attorney, public defenders, court staff, the lot of them, all on the state's payroll. Even the jurors are on the state's payroll, just at a lower payscale.

Please observe how it is assumed juries would be corrupted by being elevated to professional status (which would include considerably more training) and nobody seems concerned about all the other members of the court being corrupted by their paychecks.

To me, this is just further evidence that despite the politically correct moralistic mantras chanted in court, the state does NOT respect the contributions of jurors.
If the things we want to hear could take us where we want to go, we'd already be there.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Sy Borg »

Ormond wrote:I have long hippy hair and a giant mustache, so if I can just get the orange jail jump suit to go with my letter above I should be a slam dunk candidate for the defense.
You are a goner! :D

I worked with the A-G dept for years in various roles. I can assure you that a lot of staff do not care and most would be silently cheering you on. It's the few who do care who you need to worry about.
For instance, if you were on trial for civil disobedience, would you rather be judged by randomly selected strangers or those on The Establishment's payroll?
Ormond wrote:Yes, this is the standard complaint with such a proposal.
It's a smaller issue than the cost, which would be crippling. Legal costs are insane.
Ormond wrote:What everyone seems to forget is that the entire court, minus private defense council, are already all on the state's payroll. The judge, state's attorney, public defenders, court staff, the lot of them, all on the state's payroll. Even the jurors are on the state's payroll, just at a lower payscale.
Jurors don't feel loyalty to the government for the pittance they are forced to accept. They will always be harder to coerce into a decision than pro jurors whose careers depend on their seniors in the court. I expect they'd probably be casuals on retainer, so if they get on the wrong side of judges or prosecutors then they won't be offered more work.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated—Gandhi.
User avatar
Ormond
Posts: 932
Joined: December 30th, 2015, 8:14 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Ormond »

I worked with the A-G dept for years in various roles.
Sorry, what is A-G dept? As you can clearly see, I'm an expert on these matters. :-)
I can assure you that a lot of staff do not care and most would be silently cheering you on. It's the few who do care who you need to worry about.
Can you expand on this please? Why would some be cheering me on, and what might the others do?
It's a smaller issue than the cost, which would be crippling. Legal costs are insane.
My argument is that slave labor is not an acceptable solution to the high costs of anything.

Also, I'm not proposing that jurors be paid the same as judges and attorney's. Only enough so that intelligent people would be willing to volunteer in sufficient numbers.

It's really a question of who is going to bear the cost of jury trials. My argument is that spreading the cost over the entire tax paying population is the fairest way to distribute the burden.
Jurors don't feel loyalty to the government for the pittance they are forced to accept.
Yes, but other biases may be introduced. As example, have you considered that jurors are in a position similar to defendants, forced to attend against their will? Also, jurors whose primary concern is when they get to go home may lean towards the state on the reasoning that the police don't arrest innocent people, so let's hurry up and get this over with. I'm arguing that all jury systems will come with some level of built in bias.
They will always be harder to coerce into a decision than pro jurors whose careers depend on their seniors in the court. I expect they'd probably be casuals on retainer, so if they get on the wrong side of judges or prosecutors then they won't be offered more work.
Ok, that's a problem, so let's solve it. Surely there must be some mechanism by which jurors can be made independent of the state attorney and defense. If we are suspecting judges of being in cahoots with the state attorney, then we have a much bigger problem than the jury pool, yes?

One of the things that engages me about this issue, or any issue, is that the conscripted jury system is a widely accepted group consensus that seems quite vulnerable to challenge. It always interests me when everybody thinks XYZ, but maybe XYZ is not true at all.

Thanks for engaging with me, you seem knowledgeable, and I need folks to talk with on this.
If the things we want to hear could take us where we want to go, we'd already be there.
Gary S
Posts: 239
Joined: May 7th, 2011, 3:23 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Greta

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Gary S »

Ormond wrote:The thing is, situations like being herded around like sheep in a courthouse by state employees are so intensely boring that if I don't do something to make it interesting I might go insane.

...wearing prison-like pajamas with the words "SLAVE LABOR" stamped in big letters on the back. Oh god I wanna do that so much!
Still considering your proposal of professional jurors. But I absolutely love your moxie! :D
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Sy Borg »

Ormond wrote:
I worked with the A-G dept for years in various roles.
Sorry, what is A-G dept? As you can clearly see, I'm an expert on these matters. :-)
I can assure you that a lot of staff do not care and most would be silently cheering you on. It's the few who do care who you need to worry about.
Can you expand on this please? Why would some be cheering me on, and what might the others do?
The Attorney General's Dept. I was working there and I was not the only person who enjoyed seeing a little amusing subversiveness. Many workers in all industries have a healthy distrust of the executive, but must feign respect to keep their job.
It's a smaller issue than the cost, which would be crippling. Legal costs are insane.
Ormond wrote:My argument is that slave labor is not an acceptable solution to the high costs of anything.
:lol: "slave labour"? I think you should ask bona fide slaves about the terrible suffering one must endure in jury duty. Mountains and molehills, ole pal.
Ormond wrote:Also, I'm not proposing that jurors be paid the same as judges and attorney's. Only enough so that intelligent people would be willing to volunteer in sufficient numbers.
Pay peanuts and you get monkeys - and they'll be are open to graft to augment their meagre peanut ration.
Ormond wrote:It's really a question of who is going to bear the cost of jury trials. My argument is that spreading the cost over the entire tax paying population is the fairest way to distribute the burden.
Court costs already come from general revenue, and their budgets enjoy more statutory protections than most areas due to their crucial role in society.
They will always be harder to coerce into a decision than pro jurors whose careers depend on their seniors in the court. I expect they'd probably be casuals on retainer, so if they get on the wrong side of judges or prosecutors then they won't be offered more work.
Ormond wrote:Ok, that's a problem, so let's solve it. Surely there must be some mechanism by which jurors can be made independent of the state attorney and defense. If we are suspecting judges of being in cahoots with the state attorney, then we have a much bigger problem than the jury pool, yes?
The judge and the prosecutor will have their own agendas, but each will have influence over junior staff's careers. They don't need to be in cahoots for the underlings to be intimidated, nor do they need formal reporting lines. In my experience, when a legal eagle is peeved with you, you have real trouble on your hands.
Ormond wrote:One of the things that engages me about this issue, or any issue, is that the conscripted jury system is a widely accepted group consensus that seems quite vulnerable to challenge. It always interests me when everybody thinks XYZ, but maybe XYZ is not true at all.
It's not a big enough issue for most to care about it. The way it usually goes is this: those who really don't want to do it usually find an excuse by working the loopholes. The most common excuse is hardship, for self employed persons with tight profit margins, carers, and others who cannot afford it.

Some people are actually excited to do it. My business partner enjoys going to trials just to observe. They bore me to tears but he finds it interesting. When I worked in a legal office the receptionist used to love watching the recordings of the hearings: she'd watch it like she'd watch a whodunnit (and yes, she went on to study law last I heard).
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated—Gandhi.
User avatar
Ormond
Posts: 932
Joined: December 30th, 2015, 8:14 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Ormond »

Gary S wrote:Still considering your proposal of professional jurors. But I absolutely love your moxie! :D
Thanks Gary! I'm sure the judge will agree. By the way, can I use you as a character reference so you'll be arrested too? Thanks for volunteering! :-)

I must admit, I have an obsessive compulsive disorder when it comes to any widely shared group consensus which might actually be false, like the "earth is flat" assumption of ancient times. I smell such a phenomena here, and don't seem ready to let it go.

The primary rationale for a conscripted amateur jury seems to be that making jurors pros could create a bias for the state. The group consensus reasoning error may be that upon seeing this potential issue, we then conclude "ah, there's a bias problem with pro jurors thus we can't go there." There may very well be a bias problem with pro jurors, that seems the wrong question to me. The right question would seem to be...

Which of the various ways we might create juries involves the fewest problems?

From that question, I don't see a good case for the current system. As example....

-----------
Do we want randomly selected amateur jurors whose main understanding of the criminal justice system comes from cop shows on TV?

OR:

Do we want screened, trained, certified and licensed jurors who have to meet professional standards, like every other officer of the court?
-----------

I don't accept that pro jurors will become beholden to the judge and prosecutor, because there's no reason we can't establish a separate agency to do the hiring, firing, training etc of pro jurors. Thus, the court, judge and prosecutor would have no say over who is a juror, only over who serves on a particular jury.

Using Greta's wise advice, I have decided to substantially reduce the length of my letter to the court, and shift the focus a bit to "I don't feel qualified to be a juror" from the more sweeping "none of us are so qualified".
If the things we want to hear could take us where we want to go, we'd already be there.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7932
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by LuckyR »

We already have that, any civil defendant can opt out of a jury trial and have the judge decide (a bench trial). It would be simple to make that offer in criminal trial as well.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Ormond
Posts: 932
Joined: December 30th, 2015, 8:14 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Ormond »

The status quo must be preserved at all costs because to fiddle with it in any meaningful way brings on an unbearable burden. Thinking.
If the things we want to hear could take us where we want to go, we'd already be there.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: An Argument For Professional Trial Juries

Post by Sy Borg »

I still feel you should pick your battles, Orm. Is something so trivial worth prison or a fine? No one will care. There will be no publicity, other than (maybe) "ooh, look at the nutter". You have brains. Surely you can see this?
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated—Gandhi.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Politics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021