What are some Voir dire questions from both a prosecuting and defense attorney point of view?

Question

I am doing a paper for my criminal justice class and we need to make voir dire questions playing the role of both a prosecuting and defense attorney. I am lost, anyone have ideas?

Answer 1

Basically, the goal is to find a way to ask questions that will uncover those people who are likely to be on your side (either side).

Some of these questions are designed to find potential jurors who would be biased against your case, or good for the other side, so that you can get them dismissed from the jury. Those are the most common, and they don't have to be too subtle.

The other type of questions are those which will reveal the jurors likely to believe your argument, but you need to do it in a way that doesn't reveal your strategy to the other side. This requires a lot of subtlety. It's usually just easier to accept anyone on the jury that you can't exclude.

As far as any particular situation, look for reasons of potential bias or prejudice. So, let's take a mugging case with three teenagers (first time offenders during spring break) as the defendants.

The defense might ask questions about who has ever been mugged, or felt threatened walking home at night, or was picked on during high school. These would indicate people likely to convict because they are afraid of being mugged themself.

The prosecution might ask questions about tolerance, mercy, people who have lived a little on the wild side themselves, people who are bullies, etc. This would indicate people likely to acquit because they either identify with the defendants, or because they believe everyone deserves a second chance.

The specific questions vary based on the fact pattern. But the goal is always to find out who among the jury pool would be bad for your case, for whatever reason, and get them dismissed.

Answer 2

Basically, the goal is to find a way to ask questions that will uncover those people who are likely to be on your side (either side).

Some of these questions are designed to find potential jurors who would be biased against your case, or good for the other side, so that you can get them dismissed from the jury. Those are the most common, and they don't have to be too subtle.

The other type of questions are those which will reveal the jurors likely to believe your argument, but you need to do it in a way that doesn't reveal your strategy to the other side. This requires a lot of subtlety. It's usually just easier to accept anyone on the jury that you can't exclude.

As far as any particular situation, look for reasons of potential bias or prejudice. So, let's take a mugging case with three teenagers (first time offenders during spring break) as the defendants.

The defense might ask questions about who has ever been mugged, or felt threatened walking home at night, or was picked on during high school. These would indicate people likely to convict because they are afraid of being mugged themself.

The prosecution might ask questions about tolerance, mercy, people who have lived a little on the wild side themselves, people who are bullies, etc. This would indicate people likely to acquit because they either identify with the defendants, or because they believe everyone deserves a second chance.

The specific questions vary based on the fact pattern. But the goal is always to find out who among the jury pool would be bad for your case, for whatever reason, and get them dismissed.

Answer 3

Voir Dire questions really depend on the type of case your trying as well. Here is an easy example: If your trying a child molestation case, you may want to ask the jury if they have ever been a victim of child molestation, and so on...

Answer 4

He in all probability needs to verify what type of deal the protection is prepared to take. The protection could refuse an grant from the prosecution, and adjusting around that makes the prosecution look susceptible.