u/schwaapilz

This may be a stupid question, and I think I know the answer already but am not super familiar with how any of this works. I was watching something on YouTube and it brought a question to mind: Do probation officers, or I guess their supervisors, ever need reference from (some of) their probationers? Like if the PO's supervisor is checking up on work product, or if a PO is applying for promotion or new position. Would they ever potentially reach out to a number of past or present probationers? Thanks!

Seriously, he's garbage (not the actor, or the character per se, but Hector as a person in the show).

He's a terrible cartel boss. He has no back up plans for when his one an only way across the border gets busted. His own men want him dead. Whenever one of his dealers is short, he has them beat within an inch of their life rather than charge them vig.

When his one way across the border gets busted, he tried to use a business that is on the level and is shocked when the owner wants nothing to do with it.

He thinks hes a critical lynch pin to the cartels operations and thinks he's uber important but he's not. He walks around trying to boss Fring around and talks shit on Eladio but when his family fails to sink Frings operation and gets his nephew killed because of his own vendetta, what does he do? He runs to Eladio and tattles like a little kid!

You'd think for someone whos been in the drug/cartel business for as long as he has been, he'd be at least a little smart, a little devious, but hes just not.

Completely random thought that I would like some further information/clarification on, specifically jury selection. How does the act of the attorneys cherry picking a jury to best suit their case and desired outcome not constitute jury tampering? And how does it even remotely still fit within the bounds of 'jury of your peers'. If its was truly jury of your peers, it would be a completely random selection of the populace. Since the prosecution and defense get to try to tailor the selection to benefit their side, doesn't that inherently skew the whole idea behind a jury of your peers?