deep(?) thought in the A.M.

Though I can't speak much about specifics with regards to my jury duty, I can say that I've seen one theme played out repeatedly, in all sorts of different situations: inability/unwillingness of people to see what's right in front of them.

In all manner of criminal cases presented to us, we hear from witnesses who lived with/knew well/were related to the accused who really, really don't know that crimes were being committed. Even though there are harsh penalties for lying under oath, I'm willing to accept that some might be, oh, stretching it a little. But you'd be surprised how many seem completely genuine in their ignorance.

Over and over again, we jurors cry "How could they not know?" I'm no psychologist, but IMHO it's rather simple: some things are just too painful, frightening, upsetting, or inconvenient to acknowledge. The ability of people to tune things out is some sort of self-defense mechanism.

I think we all do this to some degree, even over things that aren't illegal ("they don't have a drinking problem, it was just those few times", "so and so's not cheating, they just like to flirt", "it's just a flesh wound"). I know I've turned a blind eye in the past when it was too painful to look at a situation for what it was.

Maybe I'm right, or maybe these are just the ramblings of an undercaffinated and disgruntled juror :P What do you think?