Thanks for sharing that, jb.
I have only had one experience as a juror.
Out of about 100 prospective jurors interviewed by the lawyers, I was chosen in a trial to determine the amount of damages owed to a land owner by the local utility who had used eminent domain to seize an acre of land. A previous trial had already determined that the utility had not fairly compensated the land owner.
I think I was chosen because I had worked for some years in land development, and I was the only one on the jury with any such experience.
The utility had offered about $4,000 for the acre of land (for a sub-station, iirc) which fronted on a 4-lane road about 2 miles from the center of a small city. The utility used a comparable value equivalent to an acre in flood plain with no road access. The fair value was determined in the trial to be about 75 times that offered amount.

The author is definitely right about the jury system being involuntary servitude. Every jury (three total) that I have been called to has been a civil medical malpractice case or one in which an electrical contractor's non-English-speaking employee sued the customer for shocking himself while working on faulty wiring. Well, duh, the faulty wiring was why the contractor was called out (after a lightning strike has caused damage).

We have too many lawsuits in this country. Non-patent lawyers are like locusts feeding on productive citizens like us.

Casey may be on to something here, but I wonder what his privatized "justice system" will be like after it becomes as bought and corrupt as the government version.