My Day in Court

[John Cole]

I am called for jury duty (a good deal in Massachusetts since jurors are only required to show up for one day unless the trial lasts longer) and look forward to doing my civic duty. A drunk driving case is going before the jury, and I am selected. After dismissals for cause, I wager to myself that I'll be the first juror gone through peremptory challenges. I'm right.

Now, was I dismissed by the defense? Or did the prosecutor dismiss me because everyone knows that all professors are liberals and, therefore, soft on criminals?

It depends. What questions did they ask you? What were your responses? Have you ever been in an accident before? Do you have strong feelings about drunk driving one way or the other? Ever have a relative injured in a car accident? There could be any number of reasons that you could have been excused other than the one you suggest.

[John Cole]

I wasn't asked any questions but the standard questions on the form, which had to do with previous criminal record (none) and if I worked in law enforcement.

[ QUOTE ]
I wasn't asked any questions but the standard questions on the form, which had to do with previous criminal record (none) and if I worked in law enforcement.

[/ QUOTE ]

The lawyers weren't given a chance to ask the jurors questions? In a criminal case? Did the lawyers have any role in selecting the jury other than challenging people based on a questionnaire?

[John Cole]

The judge asked some basic questions before the jury was seated, which I assume are standard. Do you know the defendent? would you naturally believe a police officer's testimony to a witness for the defendent? That sort of thing. I think a couple people were excused because they knew quite a few cops in the city, and one juror informed the judge that he did know someone involved in the case after he was seated. I was dismissed without any questions.

[MMMMMM]

Maybe the side which believed they had the weaker case didn't think they could put anything past you?

Failing that, then perhaps:

1) you are a teetotaler, and that was somehow on the form, or

2) you had a beer in hand, left over from lunch break

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
I was dismissed without any questions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet you look like a commie. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]


I assume that the lawyer(s) had basic information about you and that under occupation it listed something like: English Professor. Given that, I'm suprised you weren't taken outside and shot, let alone allowed to sit on a jury.

It rather pains me to say the above, but you know it has some ring of truth to it.

-Zeno

[Rick Nebiolo]

No way a smart, decent, well-spoken guy makes it on a jury. That said, all I know about juries is based on the OJ case.

~ Rick

[andyfox]

You may remember that severa lyears aback, I posted about my jury duty experience. I still say that letting the lawyers choose the jorors is like letting the managers choose the umpires, only worse. Umpires are supposed to follow certain rules, jurors can do what they please.

The impartial judge should be the only one to pick the jurors. That is, if they have the time to spare from their busy 4 hour workday.

[HDPM]

It's more like figure skating Andy. Do you want one "impartial" judge from Belarus or do you want various nations trying to stack the deck so that the France-Bosnia coalition is balanced out by the Germany-Canada faction? [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]


Judge only voir dire has many problems. There really isn't an easy fix given that jury selection is complex and often hard to analyze IMO.