Blog

R. Kelly Trial: 12 Ways to get kicked out of the jury pool

Here is a piece from the Chicago Tribune regarding attempts to seat a jury for R&B singer R. Kelly’s trial. Yikes.

Advice from the R. Kelly trial: 12 ways to get kicked out of the jury pool
By Stacy St. Clair
Tribune staff reporter
5:26 AM CDT, May 15, 2008

Jury selection is expected to resume at 9 a.m., with 10 more Cook County residents available for vetting.There wasn’t any progress Wednesday, with not a single person picked for the panel.

Candidate after candidate came in with excuses as to why he or she couldn’t serve on the high-profile case.

If the dismissed jurors this week joined together, they could write a book: “How to Get Out of Jury Duty without Really Trying.”

Some of the potential chapters:

I have a teenage daughter. Several axed jurors provided this explanation for why they couldn’t give Kelly a fair trial. “I would have a hard time see anything involving a child without thinking of my child,” one man said.

I would change the age of consent. Two who were kicked off offered this philosophy, one going so far as to suggest that “nature already had an age of [sexual] consent: puberty.”I save lives. An oncologist was excused from duty after he told the judge that jury service would create a logistical nightmare for his patients.

Um, well, er, yes, I think I could be fair to Mr. Kelly. Maybe, yes. Nearly everyone who paused when asked if he or she could give the singer a fair trial got the boot from either the judge or the defense.I’m a cop One Niles police officer lasted only about two minutes in the interview room before he was dismissed because of his profession.

I (heart) R. Kelly. Nothing gets prospective jurors booted faster than telling the prosecution they are a fan of Kelly’s. Just ask the woman who called him a “musical genius.” When prodded to say something negative about Kelly, the best she could come up with was: “He and [rapper] Jay-Z don’t get along?” Prosecutors bounced her soon after.

I’ll change my vacation plans. Overeagerness to serve on the jury is a definite red flag to attorneys. When one man offered to rearrange a trip to see his parents, the prosecution bounced him for being star-struck.

Click here to read the full article…

Simple Statistics

If social scientists are right and jurors only retain 10 percent of what they hear in a courtroom — more likely than not what they heard first — what can you do to make them remember the defense’s case?

Using only a few carefully chosen statistics or key numbers to illustrate a point is a great way to arm jurors with ammunition they can use in the deliberations room.

As an example, a general internal medicine patient died from a calf sarcoma after multiple tests in response to “arthritis-type” pain.

Focus group research in the case revealed that highlighting the extent of the efforts made to diagnose the patient’s condition was crucial. The defense formulated a phrase that was used repeatedly to reinforce its theme: “Four tests were done by three different radiologists, at two hospitals, and none of them saw any sign of cancer.”

After trial, exit interviews revealed those words rang out again and again during deliberations — “four tests, three radiologists, two hospitals, and no cancer!”

Used correctly, simple statistics and numbers help to illustrate a theme and help arguments resonate in jurors’ minds, which they will hopefully remember when it comes time to render a verdict.

“Making” the Right Jury

It’s often asked whether there are sure-fire tricks to “picking the right juror.”

First, it’s important to keep in mind that you rarely “pick” anyone – the best you can do is eliminate the worst potential jurors. But if you can’t always pick the “right” juror, there are opportunities to educate the jurors you get.

Consider this: A defense lawyer represented a corporate client who had taken a beating in the local press over the case. Worse, the judge refused a venue change, even though nearly every juror on the panel was familiar with the press’ accounts.

After the lawyer used much of his allotted time to expose special biases among the jurors, he shifted his questioning from questions designed to expose and eliminate to questions designed to educate those who would ultimately serve.

“Who thinks there was a rush to judgment in the Duke Lacrosse case – I mean by the media?”

Nearly every hand on the panel went up.

The lawyer continued, “And who thinks that a lot of opinions about those three boys changed once the defense finally put forward its case – meaning what the media had originally written wasn’t fair, or was at least incomplete?”

Again, nearly every hand was raised.

In the end, the lawyer couldn’t “pick” the right jury, so he “made” it the right jury.

1 … 32 33 34