Recently in Jury Selection Category

Here is a fun, yet informative little website that I ran across that has some good information about of variety of topics.  Some of these topics may help you with your project (depending on your role) and others are just full of useful information!

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/finding-untainted-jurors-in-the-age-of-the-internet/

I found an article that was extremely interesting to me.  When taking into the account of having an unbiased judgement in court it's difficult to do with how media coverage is so wide spread, esepcially through the internet.  They talked about how people would ask for change of venue when they were going to trial because the community knew too much about the case and they wanted a more fair trial, well that all sounds good for them to get a new venue, but in reality all you have to do is type in a person on google and you can get all sorts of information.  This article made me think of the Mark Becker case, because how could anyone in the state of Iowa not have some sort of bias about him especially since Ed Thomas was a very well known man.

After reading through many of the blog posts on jury selection and jury duty I found a link on Luke's post "It's Your Duty" describing ways to avoid jury duty.  At the top of the list were the words "jury nullification" which linked to another website that I now have bookmarked and find absolutely amazing.

            http://fija.org/  This organization known as the Fully Informed Jury Association has a wealth of information that is very helpful to jurors, and anyone else interested in researching information relating to jury selection and duties.  On their homepage they offer a critical reminder of the true function of all jurors:

            "The primary function of the independent juror is not, as many think, to dispense punishment to fellow citizens accused of breaking various laws, but rather to protect fellow citizens from tyrannical abuses of power by the government.  The Constitution guarantees you the right to trial by jury.  This means that government must bring its case before a jury of The People if government wants to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property.  Jurors can say no to government tyranny by refusing to convict."

When selecting a jury, attorneys want to know all they can about a juror so they can select or reject them.  Attorneys want to know the potential jurors' backgrounds, beliefs, biases, etc.  Sometimes this is harder than it seems; some potential jurors don't want to talk.  I found a website that gives some examples on how to ask questions in a way that will get the jurors to actually reveal information about their backgrounds and biases:

ICBFI? It is likely that your thinking WTF in your head right now but when it comes to jury duty it actually makes more sense. The abbreviation ICBFI stands for "I Cannot Be Fair and Impartial".

http://theununifiedcourtsystem.blogspot.com/2009/03/idiots-guide-to-getting-out-of-jury.html 

That is the statement that an attorney at law suggests is the best way in getting out of serving jury duty. The following websites, although they are amusing, are pretty ridiculous and some bluntly obvious.

http://www.wikihow.com/Get-Out-of-Jury-Duty

http://ezinearticles.com/?Get-Out-of-Jury-Duty---Find-the-Perfect-Excuse&id=1899538

http://www.fullduplex.org/humor/2007/06/how-to-get-out-of-jury-duty/

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/105502/valid_excuses_to_get_out_of_jury_duty.html?cat=17

If you want to take the time and amuse yourself and read all those go ahead but keep in mind that things such as being the president of the U.S. (reference to and earlier post of Obama being chosen) or other positions such as being at war, won't keep most of you average folks from serving your duty.

The statement I cannot be fair and impartial is actually quite simple and works effectively only if it is used at a correct time. It's sort of like saying that you support racism in a case that is prosecuting the KKK. The right timing is key; otherwise the trial lawyers will be onto your little plan and give you back an even more clever response just to keep you.

Let's use a murder trial as an example. A defense attorney is not going to choose you to be on the jury if when they ask everyone if murder can sometimes be justified and you sing out "I CANNOT BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL because I knew someone that was murdered and all murderers should rot in jail no matter the circumstance... See that? Perfect timing to sing ICBFI even though that person you knew that was murdered was your cousin's best friend neighbors dad.

So the point of not following all the other silly ways to get out of jury duty and to use the ICBFI method, is all about timing your well prepared ICBFI song.

 

Initial jury selection procedures quickly eliminate persons who would not be fit to sit on the jury of a certain trial.  This is necessary because many people will be unable or unwilling to participate.  The number of possible jurors is endless and finding the most fair jury would be near impossible if our legal process was not the way it is.  Common sense tells us that as the process continues, the questions asked of the jurors become more specific.  I found this questionnaire that is used for New Jersey civil courts jury selection.  

Think, if today you were called for a jury duty what would be going through your mind? Would it be how was I picked out of a whole county, city, or state? What will I even be doing? Will I get in trouble for leaving work or school? Is there any pay that comes with jury duty? If i go through the whole process, what happens in the deliberation? Am i able to talk about the case with others? Is this a criminal or civil case? These are all questions that you might ask yourself along with many others. It is not all that common that a person is called for Jury duty, so when they are it is like a whole new world for them. In most cases they have no idea that to do, how to go about things, and have a head full of so many questions. In that case it is important that a person be educated on what jury duty is, how it works, and what goes on during cases. They should also be educated on how you act while the trial is going on, and how to deliberate the verdict with other jury members.

     Jury duty is a responsibility we have as citizens of the United States of America to comply with. If looked at in a positive way, jury duty can be very educational and sometimes fun.

   This government website is very helpful with those questions. This web page will take you through three steps, 1) How jury service operates 2) The jury selection process 3) The trial process.

 

 

   http://www.utcourts.gov/courts/dist/jury/selserve.htm

 

When thinking about jury selection and the jury process I got thinking about how these lawyers and attorneys use them to their advantage. With this idea in mind I came upon a website where it talks about the art and format of asking jurors questions and how it is important to not only ask well phrased Questions but to make sure these jurors have enough time to think and provide a good elaborate answer. This not only helps the thought process of the juror and gives them insight to what the case is about but also it allows the lawyer to gather information about the types of people that he is going to be presenting his case to. This information about the jurors is important because it unveils some underlying behaiors, attitudes, and  perspectives the jurors might have; and hoe they feel about this particular case.

 

Example: the defended is going to argue that his client was a victim of wrongful or mistaken identity. He asks jurors the question...have you ever been a victim of mistaken identity? This question does two things: it presents the defendants perspective on the case and it plants the idea in the jurors head a time they had been wrongfully convicted of a crime or another situation promoting empathy for the defendant. Another thing an interviewer needs to do in addition to asking thought provoking questions is to give them enough time to answer the questions.

 

The author of this website outlines seven steps to making sure you are giving the jurors enough time to think:

1. Ask the question of the entire panel (and tell them how they should respond): "By show of hands, has anyone here ever been wrongfully accused of something?"

2. Show them how to respond: While asking the question, raise your own hand in the air.  (Telling them how to respond and then showing them how to respond will encourage greater responses.)

3. Pause.  Don't rush it.  Mentally count to 10 or so before you even think about saying anything else or moving to another topic.

4. Look 'em in the eyes.  While you're pausing, make eye contact with several jurors and use the power of your eye contact to encourage responses.  Keep an eye out for the ones who look like they'd like to respond, but haven't made up their minds yet.

5. Nobody volunteered?  Pick on someone.  Actually, pick about 3-4 people, from different parts of the room, and ask them directly: "Mrs. Jones, have you ever been wrongfully accused of something?"  By asking them directly, sometimes you'll prompt a better response.  (A good place to start is with the people who looked like they wanted to respond, but didn't raise their hand.)

6. Ask the entire panel again.  Even if no one responds to your individual questions, it's not a waste of time, because you're giving the other jurors time to finish thinking their way through your question.  Now that they've had enough time to finish thinking, ask the entire panel once again, perhaps adding a bit of a challenge to your question: "Really?  No one here has ever been wrongfully accused of anything?"

7. Pause (again).  Look 'em in the eyes (again).  Hopefully, this will prompt any hold-outs into answering the question.  If not, consider rephrasing the question, or moving on to another topic.  At least you'll know that you didn't cut off anyone's thought process and prevent them from answering. 

If you are interested there are more links on this website that elaborate on information regarding questions and answer sessions with jurors and other variables in the process

http://www.trialtheater.com/wordpress/jury-selection/give-jurors-time-to-think-during-jury-selection/

I thought this was a good video to watch. The person who talks is a criminal lawyer and tells about not only his experience going through jury selection but also his personal experience selecting his jury.

It's kind of a lengthy video but it still does a great job on how to make the possible jurors feel comfortable. Usually, jury selection is in the view of the lawyers but it is more focused on the actually jurors. Overall, I thought this was a good video and kind of interesting.

http://www.trialtheater.com/wordpress/jury-selection/video-two-tips-for-better-jury-selection/ 

He is another video (half way down the page) where he says about jury selection and what you should say during a jury selection. It kind of covers the same stuff as the one above but it goes into more detail. Also, it is a little longer than the other video.

http://www.trialtheater.com/wordpress/category/jury-selection/

 

Since I have never been called up for jury duty I figured I should do a little research on the actual process of selecting a jury. One of my roommates had been called in for jury duty on a couple of occasions so I spoke with him in regards to how it went and how he felt about the process. To sum up his comments briefly, basically "it was a waste of my time." I found this to be amusing as well as somewhat discerning considering being evaluated by a "jury of your peers" is a large part of our legal system. Upon questioning why he felt that way he responded, "it costs you money when you have to miss out on work, just to be called in twice, and sent home twice." With that being said, I can understand his distaste for jury duty. This had me wondering if he had used any psychological cues that may have led to him being dismissed. Turns out there are actually web sites dedicated in helping you AVOID jury duty.

http://www.courtreporterschools.com/?page_id=7

I also found a web site that sells a book on how to avoid jury duty. Leave it to someone to find a way to make money off of tips on how to get out of the selection process.

http://www.avoidingjuryduty.com/

The process begins with jurors being selected at random from an already compiled list of people (examples: listing of licensed drivers, public utility service records, or even polling precinct lists). After people are selected at random they are called in and go through a basic question/answer screening. If a juror has "passed" they will then be examined by the prosecution and defense teams (this is known as voir dire). This consists of general questions posed to the possible jury as a group, as well as more in-depth questions on a individual level.

There are actually quite a few aspects of psychology that tie in with this process of law. Possible jurors perceptions are tested, in which each response is judged. The entire process falls within social psychology since jurors are questioned on areas such as: race, opinions on stereotyping, and other "hot topic" areas. If the perspective juror has any sort of psychological disorder (choose any that fall under abnormal psychology) chances are they are going to be excused from duty.

In my opinion I feel that jury duty, even though it doesn't pay well (and in some instances is a "waste" of time), is still a duty we should all have to complete at some point in our lives. This should especially hit home for victims of crimes that would want a good set of jurors in choosing their fate in the courtroom.

For further readings and information please visit the following sites:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_selection
http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/jury-selection.html

For my blog about juries, I decided to focus on the challenge rights that attorneys have when selecting a jury and specific cases related to those challenges.

voir dire: is the process of interviewing potential jurors in which judges and attorneys examine their backgrounds and possible biases.

Attorneys are allowed to challenge certain jurors when selecting a jury, which is simply a request to dismiss a potential juror.

peremptory challenge: an attorney can challenge a potential juror without providing a reason

challenge for cause: an attorney must provide a reason when challenging a potential juror, whether it be related to some bias towards the case, acquaintanceship with one of the parties, knowledge about the facts of the case, an obvious prejudice, or an inability to serve such as having a mental disorder. The judge then decides whether or not to dismiss the prospective juror.

I think it is a good idea to give attorneys these challenges.  I think both are necessary because it would not be fair for attorneys to eliminate an unlimited number of potential jurors for no reason.  The challenge for cause keeps attorneys in check and requires them to provide a reason to throw out a juror.  I think it is good that our courts allow attorneys to have these rights and that both exist to keep the attorneys fair and in check.   

 

Listed below are some cases related to jury selection...

Strauder v. West Virginia (1879): exclusion of potential jurors based solely on race is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause

Batson v. Kentucky (1986): peremptory challenges may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race

J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B. (1994): peremptory challenges may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their sex

I agree with the verdicts of these cases.  I do not think jurors should be thrown out based solely on their sex or race.    These cases give everyone an equal opportunity to serve as a juror, or at least through voir dire.

http://www.wikihow.com/Get-Out-of-Jury-Duty

While searching for something to post about juries for this week I was a little surprised with the results that came up. Regardless what I tied to the word jury, at least a quarter of the sites would be about getting out of jury duty. These sites ranged from the generally oriented wikihow entry I posted above, to forums and state specific entire websites devoted to figuring out ways to avoid this obligation.

While it is technically your civic duty to serve, citizens have no problem swapping secrets to rid themselves of what most people consider a burden. The amount of information available paints a picture that jury duty is something that is looked at with considerable disdain. What is there to motivate you to spend your time and resources to commit to it, especially when considering the only extrinsic motivator is a very small monetary fee? While it is the law you must attend your summons, from what I have heard from peers, and older adults, is that skipping out on it is not a big deal and often nothing will be done about it, regardless of the fines in place. How did these attitudes get put into place?

It seems to me that avoiding civic duty, and breaking the law would be detrimental to mental health, at least for anyone who has good morals and values. Though it is understandable that it is not possible for many people to meet this obligation, the pure hatred for the process is very evident in many of the get out of jury duty forums.  Here's an excerpt from a forum detailing how a candidate actually was directly aggressive about getting out of his obligation.

"After sitting through jury selection and finding myself being "ordered" to return the following day to serve on a jury I had this conversation with the judge:
"I believe it is wrong for you to hold me here against my will when I have committed no crime."
"You're not being held here, you're serving on a jury."
"Well it is against my will to do so if you're forcing me to do this then you are holding me here against my will."
"Juror number 12, you're excused.""

This brings up a couple of questions, would this happen with any judge? Is it not true that you can't be held against your will regardless of situation unless you are put under arrest?

There are also sites out there that have these exact same questions about why people avoid the duty and have a lot of interesting comments on the forum that really gives you some insight into the mindset of people.

http://www.squidoo.com/jurydutywithhonor

A man named Scott Roeder took the life of one Doctor George Tiller. Roeder said that he was saving the future lives of unborn babies. The court has put together a secret jury of 8 men and 6 women and a couple more are coming to put the jury team together. To know if the jury is biased or not is really difficult. This case has caused an uproar for both sides of the topic throughout the nation. Many want him dead while many are wanting him to be released. The court is trying to keep the general public and media out of this case because of the sensitivity of the situation the court is discussing. There is a lot psychological problems going on here with this guy. Personally I believe this is a touchy topic so I won't be commenting on it to avoid any disputes or arguments. But I agree on not allowing the media and public in because that could cause riot or a public frenzy in any which way the case goes.

More on the case is below.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583518,00.html

Psycholgy and sociology have a very strong influence on the origin of jury selection. There are jury selection consultants that use all kinds of tools for jury selection even astrology. There are a lot of problems with the regulation and ethics behind some jury selsction techniques even the "scientific" approaches this article gives a lot of information all about the whole system of jury selection it is a little bit on the long side but is easy to navigate by topic. http://www.publications.villanova.edu/Concept/2005/jury_selection.pdf 

http://www.dcba.org/brief/octissue/1999/art21099.htm

 

I found this article written by lawyer Patricia F. Kuehn, J.D., discussing various tips that she believes are helpful for a trial lawyer to select a jury. She argues that the jury selection process is one of the most crucial components of winning or losing the case. She says that since Voir Dire is the only time a lawyer is able to interact with the jury, a lawyer should take advantage of this opportunity.

The first thing that Kuehn suggests is that you take in as much information about the potential jurors the moment they walk in the door. It is during this time to take in mannerisms and how they present themselves. Also notice things such as clothing, demeanor, and how they interact with other jurors.  It is also important to control your own mannerisms and speech, as the jurors will also be watching you.

The next step that Kuehn suggests is to be very careful with what type of questions you ask the jurors. You have to craft your questions in a way that you get the response you want without coming off as threatening She suggests starting out with open-ended questions about demographics, jobs, and things of that nature. This leads the jurors into feeling comfortable with you.

The last thing that Kuehn suggests is to use the court case of Batson vs Kentucky to your advantage. This court case found that using a peremptory challenge to discriminate against minorities was against the 14^th Amendments and that lawyers should raise a Batson objection if they feel that their opponent is challenging minorities.

She wraps up her article by again stating that the jury selection process should be paid as much detail as any other part of the trial.

 

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9906EEDC143FE433A25752C0A9649C946097D6CF

(abstract of the article)

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9906EEDC143FE433A25752C0A9649C946097D6CF

(the entire article)

The above article is from 1901, but I thought it was interesting to see the types of problems they were having in the legal system in the past. It discusses the opposition by a former judge concerning jury selection for trials in New Jersey. Former Judge Thomas Henry, challenged the jury selection during the Quarter Sessions. His challenge was overturned by Judge Skinner, so he took his challenge to the Court of Error and Appeals.

"Mr. Henry says the Constables about the court have friends whom they desire to have placed on the jury list, and the Sheriff, to be accomodating, uses the names of these friends. Some of these constables are attached to the Prosecutor's office..."

Mr. Henry argued that the chosen jurors were possibly inclined to favor the prosecution's side, because that's how they were chosen, and resulted in the money received for their services to society.

Mr. Henry asked the judge in the current case he was defending, if he would allow a jury to be selected from a list of the defense's friends, and of course the judge denied this request. Mr. Henry made a valid point that many other attorneys and judges began to agree with-the method for jury selection needed to be reformed.

"We're really getting an opportunity to find out where the skeletons are hidden."

 - Marshall Hennington, clinical psychologist

The follow short article comes from a newser,com online article source (it was short so I just pasted into onto here). It explains how technology is now influencing the selection of jurors. This indeed isn't shocking to me, but instead shows how our world demands that one keeps up with technology. The article reads...

"Get called for jury duty these days, and you can expect attorneys to know a lot more about you than they let on. Trial consultants who used to specialize in legwork--visiting neighbors and friends to gather clues to potential jurors' views--are now expert Web surfers, tracing things like spending habits, campaign contributions, letters to the editor--not to speak of the personal info on your Facebook page, the Los Angeles Times reports.

"If a juror has an attitude about something, I want to know what that is," says one veteran jury researcher. Both sides can be counted on to be doing the research, says the head of a Dallas-based research firm: Anyone who neglects Internet searches "is bordering on malpractice." "

 

I personally think that this technology could be dangerous when selectiong jurors. I want to point out that I think it is a smart move to gather information from sources like blogs and facebook. However, I would like to look into the psychological aspect of it. I can remember back when I was really young and the "cool" thing to was to write blog posts on your msn profile after a day at school. You would ramble about things you did. However, half of these things were half as awesome as I made them sound. I would even lie about doing certain things or having certain things. Like self-report data, I feel like people on the internet have the ability to portray themselves to the world as they wish to be seen. Like self report data, this can be very influenced by social desirability bias. I feel that facebook even has a strong push to portray yourself in a socially acceptable way. So as lawyers look into jury selection through the eyes of the internet I feel that they must be careful that how a person may portray themselves online may or may not be a very good judgment of the type of person they really are. I feel like technology can be a great thing, but can also cause some trouble some days too. The following link brings you to a trial that was delayed due to a facebook message.

 

http://www.digtriad.com/news/local_state/article.aspx?storyid=138378

I enjoyed doing research on jury selection because I've never been asked to serve on a jury, so I was always curious about the process you have to go through. As it turns out, it's pretty time consuming. I've provided a link that has information on the jury selection process.

Also, when one of my friends was called to jury duty, she asked me how to get out of it. Just in case any of you decide you want to get out of jury duty, I also found a website that gives 20 effective ways to avoid jury duty. Some of them are humorous, other ones are more serious. So have fun reading those!

"Basically, jury consulting is applied psychology" - Thomas Diamante

Behind jury selection lies a jury consultant.  There has been an increasing demand for jury consultation, but what is it and is it actually effective?

Jury consultants use their backgrounds in psychology to help lawyers pick jurors who are most likely to side with their client.  During jury questioning, if lawyers suspect any bias in any of the potential jurors, they can challenge them and may eventually be excused by the judge, but the catch is, this is only allowed so many times.  After those times are used, lawyers may turn to consultants (who may come from many different areas of study, but primarily psychology) to help pick jurors.

Trial consultants start the process of jury selection months prior to trial.  Random people are selected to take part in focus groups where the are exposed to the lawyers arguments.  Consultants look to their reactions and deliberation to see what characteristics are important in a particular trial.  Based on these findings, consultants develop questionaires and strategies to select jurors most appropriate for the side they are working on.

Jurors are usually scrutinized based on their personalities, past experiences, and attitudes toward certain situations.  Other characteristics such as leadership potential and how likely they are to conform also get examined.  Consultants also judge the potential jurors by their voice (confident, passive, etc.), how they interact with others during break periods, as well as body language.  

Consultants also work to weed out the potential jurors that may have a bias toward the situation.  For example, the website talks about a potential juror sitting on a case of medical malpractice who has been a victim of one and how it would be difficult for them to just be reminded of the law and not make judgment based on prior experiences. 

Lastly, the website talks about whether or not jury selection even works.  Since it is difficult to really assess the success of jury selection, some may doubt its effectiveness.  Whether or not it is effective, the industry of trial consultation is a thriving business. 


Here is a link to the source of the above information.     

 

http://www.uscourts.gov/jury/qualifications.html

Have you ever been called for Jury Duty? Have you ever wondered what qualifications are present in order to select a Jury?  Have you ever wondered what the qualifications are to be on a Jury? How about what qualifications it takes to become exempt from Jury duty or even the excuses to get out of jury duty?  I know I have always wondered this.  I myself have never been called for Jury duty, but I have a relative that is called once a year it seems. 

While thinking about this I looked online for the qualifications to be on a jury and came upon this website.  It lists the Juror qualifications, the three groups that are exempt from Jury duty, excuses, and temporary deferrals. 

The website also goes through the Jury selection and service act, the selection of jurors, and what a trial (petite) jury is and how many people are to serve on this type of jury. This website also goes through what a grand jury is and how many people serve on this type of jury.

Take a look around the website and see  just how important the qualifications and duties of a jury are.   

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-reluctant-jurors15-2010feb15,0,824472.story

"As more people seek dismissal for financial hardship, their claims face much tighter scrutiny. In one case the jury pool was so rebellious and 'scary' that both sides agreed to let the judge decide."

I found this game kind of interesting. At first you are asked to pick a case that you want to participate in, then it gives a short description of what is going on, then you pick if you want to be the prosecutor or the defense. The game then has a list of 20 jurors and gives some information about each one. You select which 12 of the 20 you would think would benefit your case the most. After you do this you are given a score and it also gives you the reasons why or why not each juror you selected would be beneficial to the case. I thought the game was interesting because it shows you to a certain extent what both sides go through in the juror selection process.

 

http://www.texaslre.org/jury_game.html 

Juries of six or twelve people are selected from a jury pool.  Depending on the case, six jurors or 12 jurors can be used.  Usually twelve people from the jury pool are called in by the court clerk; they are then asked if there is any reason why they can't serve.  After this the judge and lawyers are able to ask the people questions about whether they have any knowledge of the case or if they have personal experiences that might bias their judgment in this case.  After the questioning a lawyer can ask the judge to dismiss a juror because of bias toward the case.  The judge makes the final decision about dismissing the juror or not.  When both lawyers agree on a jury, the jurors are sworn in and then the trial starts.  Jurors are supposed to listen to evidence during a trial and decide if the person on trial is guilty or not.  This website is very informative.  Besides how a jury is selected the website has links to all the different parts of a trial.  Some of these links include motions, bringing charges, plea bargaining, opening statements, evidence, mistrials, jury deliberation and appeals.  I learned a lot about the court system through this website.

Here is the website:

http://www.abanet.org/publiced/courts/juryselect.html

 

As one of my co-workers is absent from work today because she was part of a jury pool, I became curious to the specific process of selecting a juror.  During a trial, the jury holds most of the power in their hands to decide the outcome of the person who is being defended.  As a citizen I have been asked multiple times to be on a jury, but I was to busy with school.  Although there may come a day when I will serve on a jury so I wanted to know specifically what to expect.  After browsing the internet I found a very informative website that gives step by step what a trial lawyer should do when choosing a juror.  The website even goes into detail what the goals of a lawyer are when picking a jury member and how to attain those goals.  One thing I learned from this site was that the ways in which a juror is questioned during the selection process have changed over the years.  Jurors used to be hounded on the fact that they should be fair and follow the law to the best of their ability.  Now potential jurors can join in open discussion with other potential jurors about their life experiences and what they personally feel about the case at hand.  Anyone who is thinking about becoming a lawyer will definitely find this website very intriguing.  There are many hints on how to question potential jurors to the best of the lawyers advantage.  Although it would be anyone's advantage to understand the jury selection process.

http://www.caught.net/prose/advtt/hbjury.htm