Firelord Lionheart Posted March 3, 2012 Group: Members Followers: 1 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 38 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/31/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1986 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Okay, we got a murder case here where the defendant is facing death or life without parole if convicted, so let's select the best jury for it. By that I mean one of these people must be denied at the selection process. None of these individuals, except the state employee, have a strong opinion either way on capital punishment. 1. Nick the Gamestop employee with conservative views 2. Paul the Little League baseball coach involved in church and town activities for children 3. Donna the college student with liberal views 4. Steve the Vietnam veteran with combat experience 5. Vince the plumber whose served time for shoplifting 30 years ago (he was a teenager) 6. Patricia the brain surgeon 7. Jack the retired criminal lawyer 8. Carrie the bank employee who's the mother of a violent crime victim 9. Bob the former cop whose seen enough murder cases to make him quite preceptive 10. Stephanie the forensic scientist with full knowledge in the field 11. Fred the Professor of Criminal Justice with law enforcement experience 12. Amanda the real estate agent who lives alone with her dog 13. Albert the state government employee who's not so hot on capital punishment If I were a lawyer, I'd eliminate Carrie because for one, I do not want to subject her to the emotional pain that might occur in the case due to a family member being a crime victim. Also, her opinion might be swayed because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldShep Posted March 3, 2012 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 20 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 934 Content Per Day: 0.20 Reputation: 137 Days Won: 6 Joined: 07/20/2011 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/12/1950 Share Posted March 3, 2012 If I were a lawyer, I'd eliminate Carrie because for one, I do not want to subject her to the emotional pain that might occur in the case due to a family member being a crime victim. Also, her opinion might be swayed because of it. I agree, sir....however, you failed to identify if you are defending this fellow or the prosecutor, having known a few prosecutors, I can say most of those few cared little about the pain of another. Of the few I knew most would want that person because they would believe Carrie would want revenge.A very sad day! IMHO~~~Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 7. Jack the retired criminal lawyer 9. Bob the former cop whose seen enough murder cases to make him quite preceptive 10. Stephanie the forensic scientist with full knowledge in the field 11. Fred the Professor of Criminal Justice with law enforcement experience These Four Would Not Be Allowed By The Judge To Sit On His/Her Jury On Any Of The Many Many (State And Federal) Criminal Trials I Served Jury Duty On These Would Likely Make Deliberations Almost Impossible By Introducing Their "Expertise" To Prejudice The Remaining Jurors To The Point Of Eliminating Their Ability To Individually And Collectively Determine the Credibility Of Each Witness..... Based On My Own Experience, All The Rest Would Do A Fine Job And Would Likely As Not Come To To An Unanimous And Correct Verdict Based On The Testimony And Evidence Presented At Trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted March 3, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.07 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 3, 2012 I would eliminate #9, the former policeman; any defense lawyer worth his/her salt would do the same. Is this an actual case or.....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firelord Lionheart Posted March 3, 2012 Group: Members Followers: 1 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 38 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/31/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1986 Author Share Posted March 3, 2012 I would eliminate #9, the former policeman; any defense lawyer worth his/her salt would do the same. Is this an actual case or.....? No it's a game/character study to see who you'd eliminate and why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted March 3, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.92 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted March 3, 2012 No it's a game/character study to see who you'd eliminate and why. Unfortunately, what Joe pointed out kind of invalidates the character study, don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
He giveth more grace Posted March 3, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 123 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,049 Content Per Day: 0.32 Reputation: 267 Days Won: 9 Joined: 10/22/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 3, 2012 Eliminate 1, 9, and 11. I wish I had time for this but I got to go. Keep member Steven out here won't you, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firelord Lionheart Posted March 3, 2012 Group: Members Followers: 1 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 38 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/31/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1986 Author Share Posted March 3, 2012 No it's a game/character study to see who you'd eliminate and why. Unfortunately, what Joe pointed out kind of invalidates the character study, don't you think? No, not really. Lawyers have served on juries before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zemke Posted March 3, 2012 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,028 Content Per Day: 0.23 Reputation: 451 Days Won: 1 Joined: 01/24/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted March 3, 2012 #2 Paul, because of his heavy involvement with children and the church, he would be to shaken with the heaviness of a trail of this magnitude. From any side, he could be to passionate in protecting the children from the criminal element or to soft in allowing anyone to suffer life or death, it isn't up to him. To much of a swing chance. To hard to tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 No it's a game/character study to see who you'd eliminate and why..... Unfortunately, what Joe pointed out kind of invalidates the character study, don't you think... No, not really. Lawyers have served on juries before..... Where Are You Getting Your Information? I Have Never Ever Seen One Allowed To Stay In The Jury Box By Either The State Or The Federal Court In Any Criminal Case And I'm Sure Both Attorneys In A Civil Case Could And Would Toss Any Lawyer (Student, Active Or Retired) Out Of The Box "With Cause" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts