Question for Attorneys regarding picking a Jury?

Question

Okay so you have 12 juriors right. Lets say the man you are defending is innocent. When picking the jury are you going to allow the prosecutor to pick a man that is an officer and a man that is a firefighter of the same city that the accusers father works as a firefighter for? Knowing that he has close relation to police and other fireman in the city? Could this be considered conflict of interest or even "Error in jury selection" if you as your clients attorney allow this to happen? I don't understand why my friends attorney did not disclose this information or why he did not disagree with the selection made knowing the father of the accuser was friends and framiliar with the police and other firemen. What do we do now...can we do anything to get a retrial (appeal and PDR was denied). Thanks

Answer 1

Well, more facts are needed to answer for sure, but I"ll speculate a bit. . .
First, depends on the size of the city. Officers and firefighters in a large city may not even know all the others in the other precincts.

Second, depends on the nature of the charges and the victim. Was the victim an officer or firefighter? This may make it more relevant. If not, the jurors' just being an officer and the accuser's father being a firefighter may not be relevant.

Finally, and most importantly, is the strategy of using peremptory challenges. In every criminal case, both sides are given a limited number of challenges for "non-legal" reasons. This means that the lawyer doesn't have to give a reason for dismissing a juror. From the sounds of things, the lawyer in question would have had to use one of these to dismiss the jurors in question. They may have made a strategic decision not to dismiss them and use their peremptories on more objectionable jurors. I assume they could not have used a "for cause" challenge which also lends some credence to the fact that the "relationship" between the jurors and the accuser's father could not have been that relevant.

Further, if an objection were not made at the time of jury selection for the record and overruled, it is highly unlikely an appeal can be made on that basis now. With the possible exception of ineffective assistance of counsel. That's a long shot.

Answer 2

The attorney my have objected but in jury selection you only have a limited # of challenges for cause and preemptive challenges.

A challenge for cause means the lawyer has a specific reason for thinking that a juror would not be able to be impartial. In most states there is no limit to the number of jurors who may be excused for cause. Judge still makes the decision to grant the dismissal of the juror.

Peremptory challenges do not require the lawyers to state any reason for excusing a juror. Peremptory challenges are intended to allow lawyers, both prosecution and defense, to do their best to assure that the trial is fair

Answer 3

hockyfan is right , but how doe's the defense know who is the professional jurors? and the prosecutor knows because he sees them almost daily, they are the scum who hangs around the court house and waits for the prosecutor to select them for jury duty,I don't know if these people are just so poor or if they just feel they know in advance if a man is guilty or not, but, if they vote not guilty the prosecutor will not select them again so there fore they have a good reason to vote guilty,
actually when you go into court the odds are stacked against you as a defendant, the prosecutor has all the advantage, he has unlimited assets and investigational authority, plus the fact so many ignorant people don't think the prosecutor would lie or have others to lie, that is a very bad misconception, as we have seen in Ill.Calif, N,C, and many other places who have not been publicized,

Answer 4

In Oregon, each attorney gets to eliminate 6 jurors out of a jury pool, based on any biases the attorneys feel they might have. The defense used to get 12 jurors elimnated but they changed it.